Rukmani v. State Of Haryana

   



    

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH
 

(O&M) Date of decision: 28.10.2022
      

...Petitioner

Versus





      

...Respondent

  
              

 



  

       


  



! "    ****      

  Though the present petition, the petitioner prays for an anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. in FIR No.60 dated 09.03.2020, under Sections 406, 420 and 506 of IPC, registered at Police Station Babain, District Kurukshetra.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after taking permission from the Court to sell the land (3 acre) of her minor son, namely, Ram Singh @ Digvijay (minor), the complainant sold the land to the petitioner vide a registered sale deed dated 27.05.2016; that because of some family dispute, again an agreement to sell was executed between the petitioner and the complainant on 20.09.2016, which depicts the photographs of the petitioner as well as the complainant and an amount of Rs. 20 lakh was received by the petitioner as an earnest money; that it was the complainant, who did not turn up on the date fixed for execution of sale deed in the office of Sub-Registrar; that as the petitioner was not allowed by the family members of the complainant to enter into the possession of land as she belongs to different village, therefore, being having no choice, the petitioner MANGAL SINGH 2022.11.01 04:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

   



  
   sold 2 acres of land @ Rs. 25 lakh per acre to co-accused Sheela Devi and received the amount in her bank account and that co-accused Sheela Devi and Pawan Kumar are related to the complainant being their family members. Vide order dated 16.09.2021 passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court, the petitioner was granted ad interim anticipatory bail with a direction to join the investigation.

# 

  !

   

    $     

   

   

 

16.09.2021   

   % 

       Learned State counsel submits that the petitioner in connivance with other co-accused had caused a loss of amount of Rs. 20 lakh to the complainant by playing fraud and though the petitioner has joined the investigation yet she is not cooperating in the investigation. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the paper-book.

Undisputedly initially, the complainant after taking permission from the Court sold the land in the name of her minor son to the petitioner by executing a sale deed, duly registered by the Deputy/Joint Registrar, Ladwa, and the amount was transferred in the account of the complainant and there is a delay of 3 years in lodging the FIR.

In view of the above, without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the order dated 16.09.2021 granting ad interim anticipatory bail to the petitioner is made absolute, subject to the conditions envisaged in Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.          

 

        &

   

' (  ) '*  &

    $!

(   ) '*     MANGAL SINGH 2022.11.01 04:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document