Criminal Misc. No. M-37230 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-37230 of 2010 Date of decision : 07.02.2011 Raman Khan ....Petitioner V/s State of Punjab and another ....Respondents BEFORE : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. GBS Dhillon, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Shailesh Gupta, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. Rahul Bhargav, Advocate for respondent No. 2. RAJAN GUPTA J. (ORAL) This is a petition filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking pre-arrest bail in a case registered against the petitioner vide FIR No. 341 dated 03.12.2010 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120-B IPC at Police Station Payal, Police District Khanna District Ludhiana. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to interim bail granted to the petitioner, he has joined the investigation and thus he is not required by the investigating agency. He submits that even otherwise there has been a compromise between the petitioner and respondent No. 2 regarding the entire property and thus the dispute is settled. Criminal Misc. No. M-37230 of 2010 2 Learned State counsel, on instructions from H.C. Harpal Singh, who is present in court, points out that real owner of the property namely Gurcharan Singh is residing in U.K. and one of the co-accused namely Harbans Singh impersonated as Gurcharan Singh to sell the property to Gurbakshish Singh (respondent No. 2) and petitioner signed the sale-deed as attesting witness. He submits that compromise inter se between impersonator and Gurbakshish Singh (respondent No. 2) is of no avail. Heard. It is evident that there are allegations that real owner of the property namely Gurcharan Singh is residing in U.K and the accused/petitioner taking advantage of his absence from the country connived and got the sale-deed registered in favour of complainant Gurbakshish Singh. One of the accused namely Harbans Singh impersonated as Gurcharan Singh for getting the deal done. In view of seriousness of allegations, I am of the considered view that petitioner is not entitled to concession of pre-arrest bail. The investigating agency is yet to unravel the modus operandi of commission of crime. Accordingly, the present petition is without any merit and is hereby dismissed. February 07, 2011 (RAJAN GUPTA) Ajay JUDGE