Tejveer Malik @ Tejveer Singh v. State

$~32 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 2427/2018 and Crl.M.(Bail) 1627/2018, Crl.M.A.34250/2018 TEJVEER MALIK @ TEJVEER SINGH ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Pawan Sharma, Advocate with Mr. Rajnessh Bhaskar, Adv. & Mr. Uttam Kumar, Advocate.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Through:

Mr. Ravi Nayak, APP for the State with SI Praven Kumar, PS Ranhola.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA

O R D E R

% 12.10.2018 The petitioner is stated to have executed some documents in favour of the complainant creating a charge in a parcel of land in his favour. It is his case that the said documents were executed as security in relation to a transaction of loan that had been taken by him from the complainant. It is not disputed that during the subsistence of such transaction relating to the loan which remained unpaid, the petitioner sold part of the said parcel of land to a third party dishonestly and in order to defraud the complainant. He has relied upon copy of the agreement (page 62 of the paper book), which is stated to be the first sheet of the document which has been executed on 10.06.2009.

It is the case of the complainant that the above said document of which photocopy is being presented is forged and fabricated. BAIL APPLN. 2427/2018

In the given facts and circumstances, the order dated 29.09.2018 of the court of Sessions declining the relief of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.551/2018 of Police Station Ranhola involving offence punishable under Section 420 IPC cannot be faulted. No good grounds to take a different view.

The application is dismissed.

R.K.GAUBA, J.

OCTOBER 12, 2018 vk BAIL APPLN. 2427/2018