JUDGMENT Arun Monga, J. - This is a petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in FIR No.7 dated 20.01.2019 under Sections 420/406/495/120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Sudhar, District Ludhiana. 2. As per allegations, complainant, who is son-in-law of the petitioners, has alleged that the petitioners (parents) and their daughter have played fraud with him by not disclosing the fact that their daughter was earlier married multiple times. She took Panchayati divorce qua one marriage and even the said divorce is not judicial and/or approved by any Court of law. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated as they duly informed the complainant and his family about previous marriages of their daughter. He further submits that petitioners are ready and willing to join the investigation. 4. Notice of motion. 5. Mr. Sourav Khurana, DAG, Punjab, who has joined the proceedings through video conference, on service of advance copy of the petition, appears and accepts notice on behalf of State of Punjab and submits that he is in receipt of the Enquiry Report in the shape of affidavit. The same is taken on record as Annexure 'X'. Let a copy thereof be filed in the Registry as well. 6. Perusal of the enquiry report annexed at Annexure 'X' reveals that it was actually fourth marriage of the daughter of petitioners. In addition, one engagement ceremony was also held. It is stated in the report that the daughter of petitioners has not obtained decree of divorce from any Court of law from any of her earlier husbands. She has misappropriated the cash and gold ornaments of complainant. It is further stated in the report that both the parents i.e. petitioners herein took active part in all the earlier marriages of their daughter. 7. Taking into consideration the allegations made in the FIR as well as the enquiry report, I am of the opinion that petitioners are in habit of playing fraud with innocent persons. They took active part in solemnizing of four earlier marriages of their daughter and were thus fully aware of the previous marriages, which took place at short interregnums. In the premise, no ground for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners is made out. 8. Dismissed.