The court considered the ongoing dispute resolution proceedings before IGRP and the panel's observations on unauthorized trades and admissible claims in reaching its decision.

JUDGMENT

Arvind Singh Sangwan, J. - Prayer in these petitions is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in FIR No.47 dated 09.05.2019 registered under Sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short IPC) and 66 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, at Police Station Phase-8, SAS Nagar, Mohali.

2. While issuing notice of motion (in CRM-M No.27309 of 2019), the following order was passed by this Court on 26.06.2019:-

' Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C., is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in case FIR No. 47 dated 09.05.2019, under Sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of the IPC and Section 66 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, registered at Police Station Phase-8, S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali, Punjab.

Learned senior counsel, inter alia, contends that admittedly for the last four years, the petitioners and the complainant are having business transactions and prior to registration of the present FIR, a complaint was lodged with the Securities and Exchange Board of India (for short 'SEBI'), wherein the petitioners were directed to deposit certain penalties, which have already been deposited by them.

Learned senior counsel for the petitioners further submits that as per Section 26 of the Security (Regulations) Act, 1956, a complaint for launching prosecution can be initiated only on a complaint given by the Central Government/State Government or by SEBI.

Learned senior counsel for the petitioners has further referred to IRGP proceedings dated 26.04.2019, wherein the following observations were made:

'The complainant all through has been harping on the fact that he has given the money for reaping assured returns, if that be the case, then his statement is inconsistent with the terms and conditions signed by him in the KYC form and other documents. Further, he also contended that no pre trade consent was obtained from him for the trades done in his account. Since he had signed the KYC form, the stand taken by him that the money was invested for assured returns is contradictory. The panel is of the view that the said contention of the complainant is belied and he was aware of the opening of the trading account with associated risks and he was also making pay-in and taking pay-outs from the trading member.'

Notice of motion.

Mr. Akshay Bhan, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Rahul Bhargava, Advocate, is present in Court and accepts notice on behalf of the complainant.

Learned senior counsel for the complainant submits that the FIR has been registered primarily on the ground that the petitioners have forged the signatures of the complainant on various occasions.

List again on 01.08.2019.

Meanwhile, in the event of arrest, the petitioners be released on interim bail subject to their furnishing personal bonds and surety to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. However, the petitioners shall join the investigation as and when called upon to do so and shall abide by the conditions as provided under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C.

The petitioners are also directed to hand over their passports to the Investigating Officer. '

3. Similar relief was granted by this Court to the petitioner namely Gaurav Vasishta (in CRM-M No.27878 of 2019) on 04.07.2019.

4. Learned senior counsel for the petitioners has argued that in pursuance to the orders dated 26.06.2019 and dated 04.07.2019, the petitioners have appeared before the Investigating Officer and have joined the investigation.

5. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioners has argued that the complainant Deepak Gupta was having a business dealing with M/s. Vikson Securities Private Limited since 2012 and from the year 2012 till 2018, the business dealing was going on and there was no complaint between the parties. However, in the year 2018, when the share market was down, the complainant has got the present FIR registered with the allegations that there are many flaws in the dealing of the petit