Crl. Misc. No. M- 17670 of 2010 Smt. Prem Wati and another v. State of Haryana Present : Mr. R.S. Rai, Senior Advocate with Mr. Swaran Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K.C. Gupta, Sr. DAG, Haryana. Mr. Kanwaljit Singh, Senior Advocate with Ms. Shivani Bhardwaj, Advocate for the complainant. *** The petitioners Prem Wati and Rohtash seek pre-arrest bail in a case registered against them on 9.10.2009 for the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC. The FIR stands registered on the complaint of Satish against Pratap Singh and Rohtash sons of Gian Chand and Prem Wati wife of Gian Chand. It is alleged by the complainant that he along with his brothers namely Giander, Sushil, Harish and Gajender entered into an agreement dated 14.3.2008 for sale of their agricultural land measuring 13 kanals 8 marlas @ Rs.62,00,000/- per acre in the revenue estate of village Bajri, Tehsil and District Faridabad. On 14.3.2008, the complainant and his brothers executed a sale deed in favour of Smt. Prem Wati (petitioner No.1). At that time, the accused including the petitioners gave Rs.64,85,000/- in cash and five cheques amounting to Rs.7,80,000/- each. The accused/petitioners promised that they would pay the amount of cheques in cash on 26.3.2008 and they would then take back their cheques from the complainant and his brothers. They also deposed affidavits in this regard. The complainant and his brother after receiving the cash and cheque executed the sale deed. Rohtash (petitioner No.2) also obtained signatures Crl. Misc. No. M- 17670 of 2010 [2] on some blank papers at the time of execution of the sale deed. The complainant then demanded his balance sale consideration in lieu of cheques but the accused paid Rs.7,80,000/- for one cheque and did not pay the rest. The complainant also filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act which is pending. On these allegations, it was alleged that the petitioners and Partap Singh had cheated them. It is not in dispute that insofar as Smt. Prem Wati (petitioner No.1) is concerned, the sale deed has been executed in her favour. Rohtash (petitioner No.2) on the basis of agreement dated 14.3.2008 has filed a civil suit seeking specific performance of the said agreement with consequential relief of prohibitory injunction. The learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Faridabad vide order dated 9.11.2009 restrained the complainant and his brothers from alienating the suit property and from creating any charge over the same till the disposal of the suit. Petitioner No.1 Smt. Prem Wati (petitioner No.1) was granted pre-arrest bail vide order dated 8.7.2010. The said order qua petitioner No.1 Smt. Prem Wati was made absolute on 27.7.2010 as learned State counsel had stated that her custody was not required for the purposes of investigation. Rohtash (petitioner No.2) was granted interim bail vide order dated 27.7.2010. On the said date, Rohtash (petitioner No.2) submitted the original agreement and the receipt dated 14.3.2008 which were handed over to ASI Jai Kishan, Police Station Central Faridabad who was directed to prepare recovery memo and memo of the said two documents. Learned State counsel on instructions from ASI Jai Kishan, Police Station Central Faridabad has submitted that Rohtash (petitioner Crl. Misc. No. M- 17670 of 2010 [3] No.2) has joined the investigation and his custody is not required for the purposes of investigation. In the circumstances, the interim bail granted to Rohtas (petitioner No.2) on 27.7.2010 is made absolute. Accordingly, Crl. Misc. petition is disposed of. (S.S. SARON) JUDGE August 25, 2010 amit