Criminal Misc. No. M-27264 of 2008 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. 1. Criminal Misc. No. M-27264 of 2008 Date of Decision: 14.1.2009 Surender and Another …Petitioners Versus State of Haryana …Respondent AND 2. Criminal Misc. No. M-28018 of 2008 Kaptan and Others …Petitioners Versus State of Haryana …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. Present: Mr. R.S. Rai, Senior Advocate with Mr. Anurag Arora, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. SS. Mor, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, for the State. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) By this common judgment, two Criminal Misc. Petitions bearing Nos. M-27264 of 2008 titled as “Surender and Another v. State of Haryana”, and M-28018 of 2008 titled as “Kaptan and Others v. State of Haryana”, shall be disposed off. On 23.10.2008, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court passed the Criminal Misc. No. M-27264 of 2008 2 following order:- “Present: Mr. R.S. Rai, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Meenakshi Dogra, Advocate for the petitioners. Stated that in pursuance of the agreement dated 22.12.2005 containing the terms that the sale deed would be executed by 21.10.2006, the sale deed was not got registered by the complainant on payment of the remaining sale price. Thereafter, a notice was issued declaring the time as essence of the contract. This FIR was got registered later on. Notice of motion for 14.1.2009. In the meanwhile, it is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioners, they shall be released on interim bail to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to the following conditions:- i) that the petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; ii) that the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts t the Court or to any police officer; iii) that the Petitioners shall not leave India Criminal Misc. No. M-27264 of 2008 3 without the previous permission of the Court. Sd/- (A.N. Jindal) Judge October 23, 2008” Counsel for the State, on instructions from Dinesh Kumar, Assistant Sub Inspector, states that petitioners have joined investigation. Counsel further states that in the present case agreement to sell was executed by the petitioners but they had not disclosed pendency of civil litigation and execution of agreement prior in time. Counsel for the State further submits that this complainant was made to part with earnest money amounting to Rs.19,51,000/- Counsel for the Petitioners submits that petitioners had executed agreement to sell dated 22.12.2005 in favour of one Parveen. According to them, agreement to sell, sale deed was to be executed on or before 23.10.2006. It is further submitted that 21.10.2006 and 22.10.2006 were holidays, therefore, Petitioners got themselves marked present before the concerned Tehsildar on 23.10.2006. Counsel further states that a notice was issued by them on 26.10.2006 calling upon Parveen to come forward for execution of sale deed within 15 days. He further states that Parveen did not turn up to execute agreement to sell in favour of the complainant on 8.3.2007. Counsel further submits that Parveen had filed civil suit on 9.4.2007. The narration of events show that dispute between the parties is of civil nature. In view of this, order granting pre-arrest bail by the Co- Criminal Misc. No. M-27264 of 2008 4 ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 23.10.2008 is affirmed till the presentation of report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. Thereafter, the petitioners shall be permitted to furnish regular bail bonds. With the observations made above, the present petitions are disposed off. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge January 14, 2009 “DK”