In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ...... Criminal Misc. No.M-3539 of 2009 ..... Date of decision:24.3.2009 Narinderpal Singh .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab .....Respondent .... Present: Mr. Jagjit Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sudhir Nehra, Additional Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State. ...... S.S. Saron, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in a case registered against him for the offences under Sections 447 and 379 IPC. The FIR has been registered on the statement of Darshan Lal son of Chuni Lal. It is alleged by the complainant that in respect of his land measuring 94 Kanals 13 Marlas situated in Urban Kapurthala he had a dispute going on with his half-brother Jagjit Lal. On the day of the occurrence i.e. 28.6.2008 he went to the land of which Khasra Girdawri was also in his name and he saw that the paddy was planted there and rest of the land was prepared for sowing the paddy. After inquiry, it was found that paddy was sown after taking possession of the land by Jagjit Lal, Shamsher, Sonu, Gurdev and Mohan. The petitioner is also said to be one of the accused who had sown paddy and had prepared the land for Jagjit Lal, the half-brother of the complainant. The dispute was earlier between Jagjit Lal and Darshan Lal. Chuni Lal, the father of Darshan Lal and Jagjit Lal had Cr. Misc. No.M-3539 of 2009 [2] executed a gift deed in favour of Jagjit Lal. The civil dispute pending between the brothers was decided in favour of Jagjit Lal. Learned counsel for the State has submitted that the electric motor which had been put by Darshan Lal-complainant had not been recovered. Moreover, there is a zimini in the Police record that the stolen electric motor is in possession of Mohan and the petitioner. It is also stated that Khasra Girdawri of the land is in favour of the complainant. It may be noticed that the complainant in civil suit filed by Jagjit Lal and Surjan Singh had made a statement on 16.9.1991 (Annexure- P.1) that he has no concern with the disputed land measuring 94 Kanals 13 Marlas and nor was he in possession of the same. Thereafter, Darshan Lal set-up a Will executed by his father Chuni Lal in favour of the minor sons of Darshan Lal. The said suit filed by Darshan Lal as guardian of his minor sons was dismissed on 25.2.1997. The appeal was dismissed by the first appellate Court on 14.8.2001. Thereafter, Regular Second Appeal No.4521 of 2001 was dismissed by this Court on 4.4.2006. Therefore, in the face of the order of the Civil Court and also the statement of the complainant himself that he is not in possession of the land, it is a debatable issue whether electric motor of the complainant had been stolen. In any case, that aspect is a matter of investigation. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances, the interim bail granted on 6.2.2009 is made absolute. The criminal miscellaneous petition stands disposed of. March 24, 2009. (S.S. Saron) Judge *hsp*