IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No.68318-M of 2006 DATE OF DECISION:14.12.2006 Neer Singh ..........Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ..........Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL Present:- Shri P.K. Gupta, Advocate and Shri Munish Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Partap Singh, Sr. DAG, Haryana. **** Petitioner Neer Singh apprehending his arrest in a non-bailable offence in case FIR No. 119 dated 21.7.2006 under Sections 420/506/120- B IPC, registered at Police Station Ladwa, District Kurukshetra, has filed this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for anticipatory bail. I have heard counsel for the parties and gone through the contents of the FIR. Counsel for the petitioner contends that in the aforesaid FIR, which has been registered under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. on the complaint made by Bhupinder Singh, it has been alleged that the petitioner after taking Rs.6,60,000/- did not execute the mortgage deed in favour of the complainant, though same was written on the stamp papers. Counsel contends that the occurrence relates to the year 2002 and thereafter, the petitioner filed a civil suit, in which complainant filed cross-objections and subsequently, even cross-objections were withdrawn and pertaining the said dispute, now after four years, the instant FIR has been lodged. Counsel for the petitioner contends that in view of the order Crl. Misc. No.68318-M of 2006 -2- dated 3.11.2006, the petitioner has joined the investigation. This fact has not been disputed by the State Counsel. In view of the above, the interim bail, granted vide order dated 3.11.2006 is made absolute subject to the same terms and conditions. Disposed of accordingly. December 14, 2006 (SATISH KUMAR MITTAL) pooja JUDGE