Cr.Misc. NO. M 11686 of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Cr.Misc. NO. M 11686 of 2009 DATE OF DECISION 12.5.2009 Gurmej Kaur ......PETITIONER VERSUS State of Punjab ......RESPONDENTS PRESENT: Mr. Parvesh Saini, Advocate Mr. PS Sidhu, Addl.A.G.Punjab M.M.S.BEDI,J. The petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered at the instance of two sisters Swaran Kaur and Charan Kaur alleging that a power of attorney was executed on 17.3.1998 in favour of Ruldu Singh. The petitioner is wife of Ruldu Singh. The complainants were two sisters and five brothers. One of the brothers died unmarried and issueless. All the legal representatives of Udham Singh were given equal shares from the share of Udham Singh after his death. The complainants had given their land to Ruldu Singh, who had been cultivating the same and maintaining it on behalf of the complainants. He had also been paying chakota to them. The complainants in September 2008 came to know from the revenue record that their share has been transferred by Ruldu Singh in favour of the petitioner on the basis of a power of attorney dated 17.3.1998. The complainants also came to learn that Ruldu Singh in connivance with Ajit Singh Lambderdar and Darshan Singh had executed a power of attorney Cr.Misc. NO. M 11686 of 2009 -2- by producing the petitioner in place of Swaran Kaur. Photograph of the petitioner in place of Swaran Kaur is existing on the power of attorney. On the basis of the said power of attorney, a sale deed dated 14.7.2008 has been executed by Ruldu Singh in favour of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely involved in the case on the basis of a power of attorney, which was executed in the year 1998 and that on account of the family dispute the petitioner has been unnecessarily dragged into the criminal case. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and gone through the police record and I am of the opinion that the petitioner cannot prima facie claim absolute innocence as the power of attorney dated 17.3.1998 contains her photograph. The registered power of attorney is indicative of the fact that she was aware of the execution of the power of attorney by her, impersonating her sister-in-law Swaran kaur. Even if, it is presumed that she was not aware of the document being prepared on 17.3.1998, this cannot be ignored that while her husband was transferring the land in her name on 14.7.2008, she very well knew that the power of attorney of 1998 was being used for the transfer of the land of Swaran Kaur. In view of the above circumstances, the grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner will not be in the interest of justice and fair investigation. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that it is not a case where custody of the petitioner is required. A lady, who in the greed of property has impersonated her sister-in-law and made an attempt to grab the property illegally , is not entitled to the relief of pre-arrest bail. No extra Cr.Misc. NO. M 11686 of 2009 -3- ordinary exceptional circumstances exist for the grant of pre-arrest bail. Dismissed. Nothing mentioned in the order will prejudice the right of the petitioner to seek the concession of regular bail. May 12 ,2009 ( M.M.S.BEDI ) TSM JUDGE