JUDGMENT 1. - Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned PP for the State, learned counsel for the complainant and perused the relevant documents placed before me. 2. Learned counsel submits that the agreement alleged by the complainant Govind Mathur Maheshwari, was entered into as alleged by the prosecution and the other agreement dated 10.4.06, alleged to have been entered with Pramod Kumar was not entered by him as he had business transaction with him. 3. Learned PP opposed the bail application on the ground that the police is investigating the case and has argued that it is serious case and anticipatory bail should not be granted. 4. In view of the above submissions, having perused the record of the case, I do not find it a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the accused petitioner Surendra Bhardwaj in F.I.R. No. 320/07, P.S. Beawar City for the offence under Sections 420, 406 IPC, therefore, the same is rejected.Application for bail rejected. *******