CRM-M-11262 of 2011 (O&M) - 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** CRM-M-11262 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision:11.08.2011 Jeet Kaur . . .Petitioner Versus State of Punjab . . . Respondent ***** CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN ***** Present: Mr.M.S. Sodhi, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.A.S.Rai, DAG, Punjab. ***** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J (ORAL) This is a petition for pre-arrest bail in a case registered vide FIR No.178 dated 31.12.2010 under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 & 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’) at Police Station Jalalabad, District Ferozepur. The allegation against the petitioner is that she had impersonated as Kashmir Kaur at the time of execution of sale deed. The petitioner was granted interim bail by this Court on 19.4.2011 but on 18.5.2011, learned counsel for the State had submitted that the sale deed bears the photograph of the petitioner. On 22.7.2011, the case was adjourned for today for producing the affidavit as ordered on 18.5.2011 and the sale deed bearing the photograph of the petitioner. Today, learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that the sale deed cannot be produced because it is a part of challan which has already been presented in the Court. However, affidavit of Jagatpreet Singh, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub Division, Jalalabad (West), District Fazilka is filed today in Court. In para No.6 thereof, it has been mentioned that “in an inquiry conducted by economic wing Ferozepur she had quoted in her statement that she is uneducated and was not aware about as to whose place is she being proved standing. She had also put her thumb impression on the registered deed and also CRM-M-11262 of 2011 (O&M) - 2 - given a snap for it unknowingly that she had been verified as Kashmir Kaur instead of Jeet Kaur.” Be that as it may, it is a case where the allegation against the petitioner is of impersonation as Kashmir Kaur and of execution of sale deed of her property. Thus, I do not find it to be a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail, hence, the same is hereby dismissed. (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) AUGUST 11, 2011 JUDGE Vivek