CRM-M No.684 of 2011 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh. CRM-M No.684 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 20.01.2011 Bhupinder Singh ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ....Respondents. Coram:- Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Singh 1.Whether reporters of local news papers may be allowed to see judgement ? 2. To be referred to reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ? Present: Mr. A.S. Cheema, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K.D. Sachdeva, Addl. A.G., Punjab for the State. ... Alok Singh, J (Oral). This is an application seeking anticipatory bail in case FIR No.343 dated 20.10.2010 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 102-B IPC, P.S. Samana, District Patiala. As per the prosecution story, petitioner has forged and fabricated agreement to sell on behalf of the complainant. It is the further case of the complainant that he never puts his thumb impressions and always signs the document and the alleged agreement to sell does not contain the thumb impressions of the complainant. During the CRM-M No.684 of 2011 2 investigation, thumb impressions on the agreement to sell were got compared and as per the report, it is found that the alleged agreement to sell does not contain thumb impressions of the complainant. Prima-facie, it seems that petitioner alongwith co-accused has forged the document to cause wrongful loss to the complainant with the object of wrongful gain to himself and other co-accused. Although, ordinarily civil dispute should not be given the colour of the criminal nature, however, there is no bar that criminal case and civil case cannot go parallel. Since in the present case, thumb impressions of the complainant on the disputed agreement to sell were found to be forged, hence, prima-facie case is proved against the accused. I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Dismissed. ( Alok Singh ) Judge 20.01.2011 sk.