Nitin Sethi v. State Of Haryana

-1CRM-M-25207 of 2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-25207 of 2017 Date of Decision: 26.07.2017 Nitin Sethi ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN Present: - Mr. Ishan Cooner, Advocate, for Mr. J.S. Cooner, Advocate, for the petitioner. RAMENDRA JAIN, J. (ORAL) Prayer in the instant petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been made for grant of anticipatory bail to petitioner - Nitin Sethi in case FIR No.698 dated 03.05.2017 (Annexure P-1) under Sections 420/406/120-B IPC registered at Police Station City Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar. The allegation against the petitioner is that he sold out the already mortgaged property measuring 134 sq. yards with the bank by his father, namely, Narinder Sethi, fraudulently claiming himself to the rightful owner to Ekta, Monika and Priyanka, knowing well the factum of mortgage by his father in favour of the bank.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has not committed any fraud as he was rightful owner of the property sold by him to vendees Ekta, Monika and Priyanka by virtue of transfer deed No.9108 dated 20.11.2015 executed by his father. No recovery has to be effected from him. He is ready to join the investigation. Ravinder Singh 2017.07.27 12:36 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document In view of the totality of the case, petitioner does not deserve the

-2CRM-M-25207 of 2017 concession of anticipatory bail as his custodial interrogation is very much required for recovery of the sale amount, fraudulently taken by him from the aforesaid vendees Etka etc. and also to investigate further as to how many such type of fraudulent transactions have been done by him in connivance with his father.

Dismissed.

(RAMENDRA JAIN) July 26, 2017 JUDGE R.S.

Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Ravinder Singh 2017.07.27 12:36 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document