IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc M 877 of 2009 Date of decision: 16.1.2009 Sukhdev Singh …Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent Present: Mr Anupam Bharadwaj, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr PS Sidhu, Addl AG Punjab. S.S. SARON, J. Heard counsel for the parties. The complainant – Gramin Bank made a written complaint to the Police that various intending loanees had submitted revenue records and obtained loans. The revenue records were found to be bogus and are alleged to have been prepared by the petitioner who was working as a Revenue Patwari. On the basis of the said records that were submitted, the Gramin bank advanced loans. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in fact the cupboard of the petitioner was broken and the revenue records stolen. The petitioner, therefore, himself informed this fact to the higher revenue officials. In response, learned counsel for the State has submitted that the revenue records on the basis of which loans were sanctioned by the Gramin Bank (complainant) were in the handwriting of the petitioner. 1 Criminal Misc M 877 of 2009 In the circumstances, even if the records are stated to have been stolen from the cupboard of the petitioner, it is to be ascertained as to how the revenue records on the basis of which the loans were granted, are in the handwriting of the petitioner. Therefore, custodial interrogation of the petitioner would be necessary so as to elicit more and useful information in the matter of advancement of the loans and whether these were on the basis of the bogus revenue records. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, no ground for pre-arrest bail to the petitioner is made out. Dismissed. 16.1.2009. ( S.S.SARON ) ASR JUDGE 2