Crl. Misc. No. M-33373 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc. No. M-33373 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision : 19.11.2010 Mohd. Ayyub ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. Gautam Dutt, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Shalini Attri, Sr. DAG Haryana. Rajan Gupta, J. (oral) This is a petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking pre- arrest bail in a case registered against the petitioner under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC at Police Station Nuh, District Mewat, vide FIR No.382 dated 27.07.2010. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that petitioner, who is merely an attesting witness, is ready to cooperate with the investigating agency and is entitled to concession of pre-arrest bail. Learned State counsel (on the instructions from ASI Dinesh Kumar, Police Station Nuh, who is present in court) submits that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required. According to her, the petitioner is involved in Land-Mafia and there are specific allegations against him. According to her, he deliberately attested the documents in respect of a forged sale-deed of land measuring 133 Crl. Misc. No. M-33373 of 2010 2 Kanals 19 Marlas. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and given careful thought to the facts of the case. It is evident that allegations in the FIR are serious. The petitioner is alleged to be attesting witness, who in collusion with Geeta Devi and other vendees impersonated some one as Ram Lal for executing a forged sale-deed of land measuring 133 Kanals 19 Marlas. It is only when the concerned Sub Registrar came to know about the fraud, he refused to attest the sale-deed and summoned son of Ram Lal (complainant herein). Resultantly, the instant FIR was lodged by son of Ram Lal. Keeping in view the nature of allegations, I am of the considered view that the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of pre-arrest bail. The present petition is devoid of merit and the same is hereby dismissed. (RAJAN GUPTA) JUDGE 19.11.2010 'rajpal'