Criminal Misc.-M No. 25388 of 2011 1 IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc.-M No. 25388 of 2011(O&M) Date of Decision: 29.09.2011 Dhanesh Kumar and another ...Petitioners Versus State of Haryana ..Respondent CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mrs. Baljit Mann, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. G.S. Chahal, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. …. RAJESH BINDAL, J. While issuing notice of motion on 1.9.2011, following contentions of learned counsel for the petitioners were noticed:- “Learned counsel for the petitioners sub- mitted that petitioner no. 1 is the bonafide purchaser of 12 kanals of land from Rambir son of Mange Ram, whereas petitioner no. 2 is the witness to the sale-deed. Mange Ram owned 50 kanals 8 marlas of land. As per the allegations in the FIR, he had executed a release- deed pertaining to 38 kanals in favour of his two sons and two grand-sons (sons of pre-deceased son) and kept 12 kanals 8 marlas of land for himself. It is further al- leged that one of the sons Rambir forged his release- deed pertaining to 12 kanals 8 marlas which was kept by Mange Ram for himself and executed sale-deed in favour of petitioner no. 1 for 12 kanals. The submission is that in fact, Mange Ram had executed release-deed pertain- ing to entire land i.e. 50 kanals 8 marlas. In the alterna- Criminal Misc.-M No. 25388 of 2011 2 tive it is submitted that Rambir had not sold any specifc khasra number. He had merely sold his share of 12 ka- nals out of the entire area of 50 kanals 8 marlas. Even as per the release-deed executed by Mange Ram, Rambir is the owner to the extent of 12 kanals 13.3 marlas of land as 38 kanals was released by Mange Ram in favour of his two sons and two grand-sons (sons of pre-de- ceased son). In any case, the petitioner no. 1 being the bonafide purchaser was not aware of any family trans- actions. She further submitted that in the civil suit filed by Mange Ram, the dispute has been settled between the parties and the civil suit will be disposed of in terms thereof whereby 8 kanals of land will be kept by Mange Ram and 4 kanals was given to petitioner no. 1. Mange Ram has got his statement recorded in the court to that effect.” Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Nityanand, submitted that the petitioners have joined investigation and their custodial interrogation is not required. Considering the aforesaid facts, interim bail granted to the petitioners on 1.9.2011, is made absolute. The petition stands disposed of. (RAJESH BINDAL) JUDGE 29.09.2011 sharmila