Punjab-Haryana High Court
Bagicha Singh And Another vs State Of Punjab on 15 July, 2014
Author: Mehinder Singh Sullar
Bench: Mehinder Singh Sullar
CRM No.M-20314 of 2014 (O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM No.M-20314 of 2014
Date of Decision:- 15.07.2014
Bagicha Singh and another
.....Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab
.....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR
Present: Mr. Veneet Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioners.
Ms. Amarjit Khurana, Additional Advocate General,
Punjab, for the respondent-State.
Mr. A.K. Walia, Advocate, for the complainant.
****
MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR , J.(oral) Petitioners-Bagicha Singh son of Balkar and Avtar Singh son of Bhagat Singh, have directed the instant petition for the grant of anticipatory bail, in a case registered against them along with their other co-accused, vide FIR No.176 dated 27.05.2014, on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 read with Section 120-B IPC, by the police of Police Station Civil Lines, Amritsar City.
2. Notice of the petition was issued to the State.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, going through the record with their valuable assistance and after considering the Kumar Naresh 2014.07.17 16:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM No.M-20314 of 2014 (O&M) -2- entire matter deeply, to my mind, the present petition for anticipatory bail deserves to be accepted in this context.
4. During the course of preliminary hearing, the following order was passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court (Surinder Gupta, J.) on June 16, 2014:-
"Heard.
As per the petitioners, they are owners of land measuring 148 kanals situated in village Sarangara. The FIR was got registered by the complainant with the allegations that in order to purchase their land, he contacted them and they informed him about the agreement of sale of land with Harpal Singh, Hardial Singh of village Kanoke. The complainant entered into an agreement with Avtar Singh son of Dalip Singh resident of village Muhawa, Tehsil Attari, District Amritsar to purchase the land @ `24.70 lacs per acre and made the payment to him. The petitioners are neither signatory to the agreement between complainant and Avtar Singh son of Dalip Singh nor they have received any money as per that agreement. The petitioners have already made complaint to the police that the agreement purported to have been executed by the petitioners in favour of Bagicha Singh and Avtar Singh son of Bhagat Singh was forged and fabricated.
Learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that the complainant entered into agreement with Avtar Singh son of Dalip Singh resident of Muhawa on the representation of petitioners that they have entered in agreement to sell their land with him.
A copy of the agreement produced by learned counsel for the complainant, which is taken on record, shows that agreement does not bear the signatures of petitioners.
Notice of motion to Advocate General, Punjab for 15.07.2014. In the meanwhile, the petitioners are directed to surrender before the police and join investigation. In the event of their arrest being required, they shall be released on interim bail till the next date, subject to their furnishing bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting Officer. However, they shall abide by the terms and conditions as envisaged under Section 438(2)(i) to (iv) Cr.P.C. failing which they shall loose the benefit of anticipatory bail allowed to them."
5. At the very outset, on instructions from ASI Charanjit Singh, Kumar Naresh 2014.07.17 16:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM No.M-20314 of 2014 (O&M) -3- learned State Counsel has acknowledged the relevant factual matrix and submitted that the petitioners have already joined the investigation. They are no longer required for further interrogation, at this stage. There is no history of their previous involvement in any other criminal case. All the offences alleged against the accused are triable by the Court of Magistrate. Even, since the prosecution has not yet submitted the final police report (challan) against the accused, so, the final conclusion of trial will naturally take a long time.
6. In the light of aforesaid reasons and taking into consideration the totality of facts and circumstances, emanating from the record, as discussed here-in-above and without commenting further anything on merits, lest it may prejudice the case of either side during the course of trial, the instant petition for anticipatory bail is accepted. The interim bail already granted to the petitioners, by virtue of indicated order of this Court, is hereby made absolute, subject to the compliance of the conditions, as contemplated under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
Needless to mention that, nothing observed here-in-above, would reflect, in any manner, on merits of the case, as the same has been so recorded for a limited purpose of deciding the present petition for anticipatory bail. At the same time, the petitioners are directed to join the investigation as and when required to do so by the Investigating Agency, failing which the prosecution would be at liberty to move a petition for cancellation of their bail, in this Court.
July 15, 2014 (MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR)
naresh.k JUDGE
Kumar Naresh
2014.07.17 16:24
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Chandigarh