JUDGMENT

Daya Chaudhary, J. - Petitioner-Hardeep Sharma has approached this Court for grant of anticipatory bail to him in case FIR No.523 dated 22.09.2018 registered under Sections 389, 384 read with Section 34 of the IPC at Police Station City Hansi, District Hisar.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the case, whereas, he was not involved. The only allegation against the petitioner is that he collected some amount on instructions of one Dholia Gurjar. No allegation has been made in the FIR that the petitioner ever demanded any money and the allegations are totally vague. The complaint was lodged at the instance of Ex. MC Krishan as he himself did not pay the amount. The story made up by the prosecution is not worth believing and nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner and hence, his custodial interrogation is not required. The petitioner is ready to join investigation.

3. Learned State counsel has opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that not only the specific allegations are there but the specific role has been attributed to the petitioner. He further submits that not only the amount was collected but the same was duly received and conversation of the petitioner with other persons was also got recorded. Serious allegations of extortion of amount by putting fear in the mind of the complainant are there.

4. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the contents of the FIR as well as other documents available on the file including the order of dismissal of bail.

5. As per allegations in the FIR, on 03.08.2018 at about 10.00 p.m, an altercation took place between one Vijay as well as Renu and her sons. In that quarrel, the leg of Vijay was broken. The persons of the neighbour had quarreled with Vijay and he moved a complaint in the Police Station, Hansi stating therein that some women, namely, Sarita wife of unknown and her daughters as well as Renu wife of unknown and her son Rahul along with his friends were involved in the bad activities. On raising objection by Vijay, his leg was broken. On making complaint by neighbours, the police took said persons in the police station. Ex. MC Krishan reached at the spot and contacted the police. It was told that a case under Section 376 IPC has been registered against one Ramesh, whereas, no case was registered against him. He came back and on the next day, he met SHO, who was known to Ex.MC Krishan. He made a call to SHO and to Randhir and came to know that no case was registered. ASI Randhir was telling that he would register a case against Ramesh. Dholia Gurjar asked ASI Randhir that when Ramesh had not committed any offence then why the FIR was being registered against him. ASI Randhir abused Ramesh. A call was received by Krishan Ex. M.C from Dholiya Gurjar stating that the police was demanding Rs. 14 lacs for disposing of the case. On the next day, Ex. MC Krishan talked to the police officials and it was stated that the case had already been sent to Superintendent of Police. Ex. MC Krishan came to Dholiya Gurjar, who asked him to give Rs. 10 lacs by Ramesh. On 06.03.2018, an amount of Rs. 2 lacs was given to Dholiya Gurjar after taking the money from Ex. M.C. Krishan and Sunil. On 08.03.2018, the remaining amount of Rs. 6 lacs was demanded by Hardeep Sharma (the present petitioner). Subsequently, it came to the notice that no case was registered. Those persons including the petitioner extorted the money from the complainant under the fear of implication in a false case of rape. On the basis of that complaint, the present FIR was registered.

6. Not only the specific allegations regarding demanding and receiving of the amount are there but a specific role has been attributed to the petitioner. The concession of anticipatory bail can be granted by considering the nature of allegations as well as the role attributed to the petitioner. In the