Crl. Misc. No. M-1258 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc. No. M-1258 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision : April 18, 2011 Jagtar Singh and another ...Petitioners Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. B.S. Sewak, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Shailesh Gupta, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Rajan Gupta, J. This is a petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking pre- arrest bail in a case registered against the petitioners under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC at Police Station Lehra, District Sangrur, vide FIR No.186 dated 9th December, 2010. Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the case. According to him, power of attorney in question was registered before Sub Registrar, Bhikhi on 4th November, 2009. On the basis of same, a sale-deed was executed in favour of Pritpal Singh and Kesar Singh. When the complainant came to know of execution of the power of attorney, he gave a complaint to Senior Superintendent of Police, Sangrur wherein name of petitioners did not find mention. In any case, the investigation has to proceed on the basis of documentary evidence and thus, the petitioners are entitled to the concession of pre-arrest bail. Crl. Misc. No. M-1258 of 2011 Learned State counsel, however, vehemently opposed the prayer for pre-arrest bail. He contended that during investigation, statements of Kesar Singh, Balbir Singh and Pritpal Singh were recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. From the said statements, it became clear that Jagtar Singh and Ajaib Singh (petitioners herein) were residents of same village as Puran Singh, and had hatched a conspiracy to get a forged power of attorney executed. According to him, one Raj Singh impersonated as Puran Singh and got power of attorney dated 4th November, 2009 executed in the name of Kulwant Singh. On the basis of said fake power of attorney, a sale-deed dated 30th November, 2009 was executed in favour of Kesar Singh and Pritpal Singh. Raj Singh was later arrested and during interrogation he pointed towards complicity of the petitioners in the commission of crime. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and given careful thought to the facts of the case. It appears that land measuring 08 Kanals 16 Marlas was owned by one Puran Singh son of Kallu. Puran Singh died way back in 1979. The petitioners, who are residents of same village to which Puran Singh belonged, hatched a conspiracy with the co-accused to grab the land belonging to Puran Singh. One Raj Singh, thus, impersonated as Puran Singh and a fake power of attorney was executed in the name of Kulwant Singh. According to investigation conducted so far, Kulwant Singh executed a sale deed dated 30th November, 2009 in favour of Pritpal Singh. Out of the consideration amount of Crl. Misc. No. M-1258 of 2011 Rs.4,30,000/- received by the accused, Rs.25,000/- was paid to Raj Singh for impersonating as Puran Singh. Rest of the amount was distributed amongst themselves. It is, thus, clear that petitioners played an active role in the commission of crime. In view of statements of Kesar Singh and Balbir Singh recorded by the investigating agency, affidavits furnished by Mohinder Singh and Kulwant Singh and statement of Raj Singh, role of the petitioners needs to be thoroughly investigated. During course of arguments, learned State counsel also referred to affidavit of Tarun Rattan, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub Division, Moonak filed before this court, in which it has been stated that custodial interrogation of the petitioners is required to unearth the conspiracy and role played by various persons. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered view that this is not a fit case for extending the benefit of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners. Their custodial interrogation may be required for taking the investigation to its logical end. The petition is, thus, devoid of merit and is hereby dismissed. (RAJAN GUPTA) JUDGE April 18, 2011 'rajpal'