IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM No. M-18891 of 2011 Decided on:- 19.07.2011 Anil Kumar ......Petitioner Versus State of Haryana .......Respondent Coram Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.M.S.Bedi Present: Mr. Gaurav Deep Goel, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Shalini Attri, DAG, Haryana. Mr. Pankaj, Advocate for the complainant. **** M.M.S.Bedi, J(Oral) Ravi Kumar is alleged to have entered into an agreement of sale with the complainant Prem Kumar and received a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- whereas the property stood already alienated in favour of Sushma Devi. The petitioner is alleged to have identified Ravi Kumar and attested the document of agreement of sale. Counsel for the complainant submits that the petitioner is a property dealer and that he had persuaded the complainant to part with money. Heard. The petitioner has joined investigation. It will be a moot point during trial whether petitioner had a knowledge about Ravi Kumar having already sold property on 28.12.2011 as he does not appear to be a witness as it is apparent that he has not participated in the earlier transaction of sale of the same property of Ravi Kumar, Ravi Kumar appears to be real culprit, for the reasons best known to the prosecution agency, he has not been arrested. The petition is allowed. It is ordered that in case of arrest of the petitioner, he shall be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting Officer subject to the condition that petitioner will join investigation as and when required and that he will not tamper with the evidence or hamper the investigation. He will not leave India without the permission of the Court. 19.07.2011 (M.M.S.Bedi) mamta Judge