Surinder Kaur vs State Of Punjab on 10 February, 2009

Criminal Misc. No.M-3229 of 2009                             -1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH


                                        Criminal Misc. No.M-3229 of 2009
                                        Date of Order: 10.02.2009

Surinder Kaur

                                                                  ...Petitioner

                                  Versus

State of Punjab
                                                               ..Respondent

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA

Present: Mr. Amit Dhawan, Advocate
for the petitioner.

Mr. K.S.Dadwal, Addl. A.G.,Punjab

RAJIVE BHALLA, J (Oral).

Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 438 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure, is for grant of anticipatory bail, in case FIR No.221,

dated 13.12.2008, registered under Sections 406, 420 of the Indian Penal

Code, at Police Station Nurmehal, District Jalandhar.

As per the allegations in the FIR, the petitioner received

Rs.3,90,000/- to send the complainant’s son to Cyprus and though he was

sent to Cyprus the visa and other documents were found to be forged.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that in a similar complaint filed

before the Anti Fraud Cell, Jalandhar, the petitioner has not been named.

The allegations against the petitioner have been levelled at the behest of

her daughter in law, who resides in Cyprus, and has strained relations with

her husband.

Counsel for the State of Punjab, on the other hand, submits that

apart from the present FIR, the petitioner is an accused in another case. It

is also submitted that, though, in the complaint made to the Anti Fraud Cell,

Jalandhar, the petitioner is not referred to as an accused, but after
Criminal Misc. No.M-3229 of 2009 -2

investigation the petitioner’s involvement has come to light. The

petitioner’s custodial interrogation is, therefore, required to unravel the

truth.

I have heard counsel for the petitioner, perused the FIR and also

considered submissions made by counsel for the State of Punjab.

The petitioner, though a lady and a widow, fraudulently duped an

innocent person of Rs.3,90,000/- on the pretext of sending his son abroad.

The complainant’s son was sent abroad but the visa etc. were found to be

forged. It would also be necessary to mention here that the petitioner is

accused of another similar offence, for which she was arrested but is now

on bail.

In view of what has been stated hereinabove, the present petition

is dismissed.

However, as the petitioner is a women, in case she surrenders

before the trial court, within a fortnight and files an application for grant of

regular bail, the same shall be considered and decided within three days of

the conclusion of the police remand, if any.

February 10, 2009                                       (RAJIVE BHALLA)
nt                                                         JUDGE