In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ...... (1) Criminal Misc. No.M-16170 of 2009 ..... Date of decision:16.12.2009 Lal Singh, Ex-Sarpanch .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab .....Respondent .... (2) Criminal Misc. No.M-16639 of 2009 ..... Ajaib Singh, Lambardar .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab .....Respondent .... Present: Mr. H.P.S. Ghuman, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Amarjot Singh Sidhu, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State. Mr. Vikas Mehsempuri, Advocate for the complainant. ..... S.S. Saron, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. This order will dispose of Criminal Misc. No.M-16170 of 2009 filed by Lal Singh, Ex-Sarpanch as also Criminal Misc. No.M-16639 of 2009 filed by Ajaib Singh, Lambardar respectively of Village Narmana, Police Station Sadar Nabha, District Patiala. The FIR in the case has been registered on the complaint of Cr. M. No.M-16170 of 2009 & Cr. Misc. No.M-16639 of 2009 [2] Ram Dayal Singh, Member, Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee, Amritsar. It has been alleged that Ajaib Singh, Lambardar (petitioner in Criminal Misc. No.M-16639 of 2009) had obtained family pension by misrepresentation. The date of birth of Ajaib Singh in the school leaving register is 25.4.1957 and that of his wife Smt. Surjit Kaur is 27.4.1964. However, they were receiving old age pension by representing themselves to be more than 65 years of age. Lal Singh, Ex-Sarpanch (petitioner in Criminal Misc. No.M-16170 of 2009) had done false attestation of the pension application. After giving my thoughtful consideration to the matter and hearing learned counsel for the parties, it may be noticed that the case is based primarily on documentary evidence. The petitioners Ajaib Singh has referred to various documents to show that he is more than 65 years of age. Learned counsel appearing for the complainant-Ram Dayal Singh has referred to the documents (Annexures-R.1 to R.7) to contend that the age of petitioner-Ajaib Singh was less than 65 years. In terms of the voters' list of 2009 (Annexure-R.1), Ajaib Singh is recorded as 68 years of age. Therefore, at the time of considering the grant of pension on 8.10.2006 (Annexure-P.3) it is submitted that he was less than 65 years. Besides, a reference has been made to the verification of age by Dr. Ashudeep Rupa, Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Nabha. In his report dated 25.7.2009 (Annexure-R.5) it is stated that age of Ajaib Singh and Surjit Kaur on their physical appearance and on the basis of copy of ration cards has been verified. It is stated that he had not got conducted any X-ray examination and their age can be more or less than 68 years and 62 years respectively as Cr. M. No.M-16170 of 2009 & Cr. Misc. No.M-16639 of 2009 [3] represented by them. Learned counsel for the State has shown the copy of the school leaving register in which the date of birth of Ajaib Singh is recorded as 25.4.1957. It may, however, be noticed that these aspects have to be established by leading evidence and the case, as already observed, being primarily based on documentary evidence, the custody of the petitioners would not be required. Insofar as Lal Singh, Ex-Sarpanch (petitioner in Criminal Misc. No.M-16170 of 2009) is concerned, it has been stated that he is involved in another case. However, for the same, necessary investigations are to be carried out in the said case. In the present case his custody would not be required for the purposes of investigations and his guilt is not to be pre-judged without trial. In view of the above, it would be just and proper to confirm the interim bail that was granted. Accordingly, the criminal miscellaneous petitions are allowed and the interim bail granted to Lal Singh (petitioner) on 10.6.2009 and that granted to Ajaib Singh (petitioner) on 18.6.2009 are made absolute. The criminal miscellaneous petitions stand disposed of. December 16, 2009. (S.S. Saron) Judge *hsp* NOTE: Whether to be referred to the Reporter or not:Yes/No