Crl. Misc. No. M-15463 of 2009, Crl. Misc. No. M-15922 of 2009 & Crl. Misc. No. M-26976 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-15463 of 2009 Date of Decision: September 28, 2010 Sunil Sharma ........Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ........Respondent And Crl. Misc. No. M-15922 of 2009 Ramesh Kumar ........Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ........Respondent And Crl. Misc. No. M-26976 of 2009 Dev Raj ........Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ........Respondent ****** CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr. Diwan S. Adlakha, Advocate, for the petitioner In CRM-M-15463 of 2009 & CRM-M-26976 of 2009 Mr. B.S. Makkar, Advocate for Mr. Majeet Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner In CRM-M-15922 of 2009. Mr. Satyavir Singh Yadav, DAG, Haryana. Mr. Ravi Sharma, Advocate for the complainant. SABINA, J. Vide this judgment above noted three petitions would be disposed of as they have arisen out of the same FIR. Crl. Misc. No. M-15463 of 2009, Crl. Misc. No. M-15922 of 2009 & Crl. Misc. No. M-26976 of 2009 2 Petitioners have filed this petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.60 dated 13.4.2009 registered under Sections 406,420,34 of Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC'), at Police Station Pinjore, District Panchkula and Sections 467,468,471,120-B IPC (added lateron) in FIR registered against Ramesh Kumar. The contents of the FIR (Annexure P-1) read as under:- “I Rajinder Kumar son of Shri Ronak Ram, am a permanent resident of Grain Market, Gohana, District Sonepat. I do hereby submit in my affidavit as follows: 1. That on 2.11.2007 I had purchased land measuring about 28 Bighas situated in village Abdullapur, Tehsil Kalka, District Panchkula from Dev Raj son of Shri Babu Ram resident of Village Saketri, Tehsil & District Panchkula and the agreement to sell of the same was got executed after seeing the agreement to sell executed with the actual owner and affidavits of tenants. 2. That the vendor and his son Sunil promised to deliver vacant possession of passage having width of 25 Ft. as per site plan, after removing the temporary encroachment by a Hotel owner over it, within 10 days. 3. That Shri Dev Raj, as per the agreement to sell, delivered the written possession at the time of the agreement, whereas the son of Dev Raj namely Sunil kept on getting stated from the cultivators for several months that physical possession will be delivered after harvesting Crl. Misc. No. M-15463 of 2009, Crl. Misc. No. M-15922 of 2009 & Crl. Misc. No. M-26976 of 2009 3 the crops. But till date neither Dev Raj & his son have delivered physical possession of the land nor have cleared the passage, whereas according to the agreement to sell, the sale deed was agreed to be executed within a period of six month after clearing the passage. 4. That the above said persons, by giving wrong statements, wandering and by false oral commitments, have put our land in dispute and are trying to dispose off/sell our land in connivance with other persons and property dealers. 5. That the son of Dev Raj namely Sunil, who is Advocate by profession, received cash amount from me against a cheque and issued a receipt in lieu thereof and said to give the Cheque later on the pretext that I will give you the cheque after getting from the bank. 6. That 4-5 companions of Sunil Kumar are pressurizing me to get the agreement to sell cancelled by threatening me to implicate me in some case. These persons i.3. Sunil, Dev Raj, Ramesh Kumar, Dharam Pal Verma and other two persons, under a well planned conspiracy, have conducted recording of my Mobil phone. 7. That the above noted persons, by giving threats of goons associated with Sunil and by sending me letters containing threats, are trying to grab my land and money. These persons have caused mental and financial loss to me and my family members in different ways and these persons want to grab my property by planning conspiracy . It is therefore most Crl. Misc. No. M-15463 of 2009, Crl. Misc. No. M-15922 of 2009 & Crl. Misc. No. M-26976 of 2009 4 respectfully prayed that the above noted matter may be thoroughly investigated and stern action my be taken against the culprits. Note : Copies of agreement to sell and other documents are enclosed herewith. Dated: 21.03.09 Gohana. Sd/- Rajender Kumar.” Learned counsel for the petitioners have submitted that the petitioners have been falsely involved in this case. In fact, the matter had been duly settled between the parties and yadashat receipt was prepared in this regard. Copy of the receipt has been placed on record. Learned State counsel, who is assisted by the counsel for the complainant, on the other hand, has submitted that the alleged yadashat receipt was in fact a forged document. No such compromise had been effected between the parties. Petitioners are required for custodial interrogation. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that these petitions deserve dismissal. The allegations levelled against the petitioners are serious in nature. The execution of receipt relied upon by the petitioners in support of a compromise effected between the parties has been denied by the learned counsel for the complainant and it has been alleged that the same does not bear the signature of Rajinder Kumar, the complainant. Petitioners are required for custodial interrogation. Accordingly, these petitions are dismissed. (SABINA) September 28, 2010 JUDGE Anand Crl. Misc. No. M-15463 of 2009, Crl. Misc. No. M-15922 of 2009 & Crl. Misc. No. M-26976 of 2009 5