Harpreet Singh v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-31384-2015 (O&M).

Decided on: October 1, 2015.

Harpreet Singh .. Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

State of Punjab .. Respondent(s) * * *

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.S.BEDI * * * PRESENT Mr.Divya Vishavjeet Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr.Gazi Mohammad, DAG., Punjab.

Mr.Sukhjinder Singh Behl, Advocate, for respondent No.2 M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) Petitioner seeks concession of regular bail in a case registered at the instance of Malwinder Singh alleging that the petitioner in connivance with his other co-accused namely Ranjit Singh, Bhupinder Singh and Resham Singh had prepared false and forged general power of attorney of sister and sister in law of the complainant and made an attempt to sell the property of the complainant. While petitioner was negotiating with the complainant to sell the property of sister and sister in law of the complainant on the basis of forged general power of attorney, the case was registered.

Counsel for the complainant has intervened to

oppose the bail application contending that the co-accused of the petitioner Ranjit Singh, Bhupinder Singh and Resham Singh have not yet been arrested and that the release of the petitioner will prejudice the trial as they are the proclaimed offenders. Challan has already been presented against the petitioner. He has been in custody w.e.f. 23.7.2015. I have considered the facts and circumstances of the case. Prima facie no wrongful loss has been caused to the complainant by alienation of any property of the complainant. Statements of sister and sister-in-law have been recorded. I have carefully gone through the police record. Statements of sister and sister in law of the complainant has been recorded to the effect that the petitioner along with his co-accused had made an attempt to sell the property.

I have heard the counsel for the petitioner as well as the counsel for the complainant and gone through the police record. In the present case, challan has been presented. It will be a debatable issue whether the petitioner could be said to have made a false document and used the same as genuine to cause any wrongful loss to anyone. Prima facie, it appears to be a case, at the most, of an attempt to cheat the complainant. The petitioner has been in custody w.e.f. 23.7.2015. No useful purpose will be served by keeping him in custody. The trial is likely to take a long time. Without expression of any opinion on merits of the

case, this petition is allowed. It is ordered that the petitioner will be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

(M.M.S.BEDI) JUDGE October 1, 2015.

rka RAJ KUMAR ARORA 2015.10.05 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document