- (1.) Present petition has been filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in case arising out of FIR No.147 dated 11.05.2012, registered at Police Station Sadar, Gurgaon, under Sections 420/406 IPC.
(2.) While granting interim bail, the following order was passed on 30.05.2012:- "Present petition has been filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in case arising out of FIR No.147 dated 11.05.2012, registered at Police Station Sadar, Gurgaon, under Sections 420/406 IPC. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the FIR registered against the petitioner is based on false and fabricated facts. Learned counsel for the petitioners has referred to Annexure P/16 whereby Rahul Gahlot, son of the complainant has been interacted with the petitioners. Learned counsel has further referred to Annexure P/17, specifically page no.20, wherein the name of the customer has been mentioned as "Rahul Gahlot" dated 09.12.2010, whereby, he was sent on training under the authorized representative i.e. the petitioner. In addition to it, learned counsel has further argued that the agreement (Annexure P/21) indicates that the petitioner is an authorised representative of the Company. Learned counsel has further referred to Annexure P/3 which is an inter-se communication between the petitioner and the company where he has been authorised for sending the various types of trainers for the purpose of courses. Learned counsel has further referred to Annexure P/21, whereby it has been mentioned that the petitioners are the authorized representatives of the Company and they have referred to the name of Rahul Gahlot, son of the complainant. Learned counsel for the petitioners further states that prima facie the averments as mentioned in the complaint to the effect that some unknown person met with Rahul Gahlot, are not correct. All these averments are not based on the actual facts, rather, the documents referred herein above indicate that the son of the complainant was known to the petitioners since December 2010. Furthermore, both the complainant and his son are educated persons. There are no reasons that they will hand over the cash amount without any receipt. Notice of motion to the Advocate General, Haryana for 17.07.2012. Meanwhile, in the event of arrest, the petitioners shall be admitted to interim bail on their furnishing personal and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting / Investigating Officer. The petitioners shall, however, join the investigation as and when called for and they will also abide by the conditions as specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C."
(3.) Thereafter, a Crl. Misc. Application No. 36835 of 2012 was moved by the petitioner that the Investigating Officer is harassing the petitioner and neither bail bonds were being accepted nor he was allowed to join investigation. So, direction was issued by this Court on 05.07.2012 to submit his personal bond as well as personal surety with regard to the property situated in Delhi before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurgaon.;