Crl. Misc. No.M-24833 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc. No.M-24833 of 2010 Date of Decision: 09.11.2010 Anil Kumar ....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ...Respondent CORAM : Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur Present:- Mr. Jitender Dhanda, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Preeti Chaudhary, A.A.G., Haryana for the respondent-State. Mr. Gourav Jain, Advocate for the complainant. ***** 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? ** NIRMALJIT KAUR, J. (ORAL) This is a petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.238 dated 27.05.2010 under Sections 420, 447, 448, 452, 455, 467, 468, 471, 472, 323, 327, 506, 120-B IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Hisar. The allegation against the present petitioner is that he was the witness to the sale deed between Naresh Goyal and Krishan Malik. Krishan Malik is the purchaser of the land in dispute from Naresh Goyal. It is further contended that the present petitioner knew that the land did not belong to Naresh Goyal as Anil Kumar had earlier filed a suit for Crl. Misc. No.M-24833 of 2010 2 declaration with respect to the property bearing Khasra No.4098. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, contended that Naresh Goyal had sold the property to Krishan Malik on the basis of inheritance and claiming himself owner vide Virasat Intakal No.5938 sanctioned on 13.05.2010. It is further stated that the said khasra number involved in the sale deed was 1432 and 1430, whereas, the suit was with respect to Khasra No.4098 and 17 other Khasra numbers. Khasra nos. 4132 and 4130 are not a part of the said suit. It is a disputed question and a matter of evidence as to whether the land involved in the FIR is the subject matter of the suit filed by the present petitioner or not. In any case, Krishan Malik bought the land from Naresh Goyal. Naresh Goyal is claiming ownership on the basis of inheritance. The present petitioner is only a witness to the said sale deed. Krishan Malik has already been enlarged on bail. Learned counsel for the respondent, on instructions from ASI Ram Kumar, states that the present petitioner has since joined the investigation. Accordingly the present petition is allowed and the order dated 10.09.2010 passed by this Court is made absolute. (NIRMALJIT KAUR) 09.11.2010 JUDGE gurpreet