Jagnam Singh And ANR v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM No.M-23492 of 2016 (O&M) Date of Decision: September 14, 2016 Jagnam Singh and another

...Petitioners

VERSUS

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

Present:

Mr.Aseem Kataria, Advocate for the petitioners.

Ms.Shivali, Asstt. Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.

**** INDERJIT SINGH, J.

Petitioners have filed this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No38 dated 30.03.2016 under Sections 420 and 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Sadar Jalalabad (W), District Fazilka.

Notice of motion was issued and learned State counsel appeared and contested the petition.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record. From the record, I find that the FIR in the present case has been registered on the basis of the application, wherein the applicant asked for action against Sukhdev Singh, Davinder Kaur, Ranbir Singh, Jagjit Singh Vineet Gulati 2016.09.15 17:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CRM No.M-23492 of 2016 -2and Paramjit Singh. The main allegations are against Sukhdev Singh, who entered into an agreement to sell with the complainant and has also received earnest money etc. Though name of Jagnam Singh is there in the application but the only allegation is that Sukhdev Singh stated himself to be owner of land measuring 80 kanals, which was allegedly purchased by him through two separate agreements of 40 kanals each from Harsharan Kaur @ Deep Khanna and from Jagnam Singh.

The present petitioners have already joined the investigation. The petitioners are not required for investigation or interrogation purposes. They are not the main accused and they have not cheated the complainant. No useful purpose will be served by sending the petitioners to custody. 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 petitioners are entitled to benefit of grant of anticipatory bail. Therefore, the present petition is accepted and the order dated 15.07.2016 granting interim bail to the petitioners is made absolute. September 14, 2016 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No Vineet Gulati 2016.09.15 17:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh