Harjinder Singh Dhaliwal v. State Of Ut Chandigarh

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM No.M-15105 of 2018 (O&M) Date of Decision: May 01, 2019 Harjinder Singh Dhaliwal

...Petitioner

VERSUS

State of U.T. Chandigarh and others

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

Present:

Ms.Satinder Kaur, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr.Rajiv Sharma, APP for the respondent-U.T. Chandigarh.

Mr.H.S.Deol, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3.

**** INDERJIT SINGH, J.

Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.443 dated 13.12.2017 under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC, registered at Police Station Sector 36, Chandigarh.

Notice of motion was issued. Learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for respondents No.2 and 3 appeared and contested the petition.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record. VINEET GULATI 2019.05.02 16:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh From the record, I find that there is allegation against the

CRM No.M-15105 of 2018 -2present petitioner that he forged the rent deed etc. along with co-accused. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the complainant himself has filed ejectment petition before the Rent Controller and dispute is regarding rate of rent and rent is being paid before Rent Controller. He also contended that petitioner has not forged any rent agreement, rather, his signatures were obtained and the original document is with the complainant. The petitioner has already joined the investigation. He is not required for custodial interrogation. The case is based on documentary evidence. No useful purpose will be served by sending and keeping the petitioner in custody till the disposal of the case.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and without discussing the facts of the case in minute details and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case, where the petitioner is entitled to benefit of anticipatory bail. Therefore, the present petition is accepted and the order dated 23.04.2018 granting interim bail to the petitioner, is made absolute.

May 01, 2019 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No VINEET GULATI 2019.05.02 16:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh