IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-33789 of 2011 Date of decision : December 12, 2011 Kailash ....Petitioner versus State of Haryana and another ....Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice L.N. Mittal Present : Mr. JP Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. CS Bakshi, Addl. AG Haryana for respondent no. 1 None for respondent no. 2 L.N. Mittal, J. (Oral) Accused Kailash has filed this petition for anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 198 dated 25.10.2010, under sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120- B IPC, registered at Police Station Nangal Chaudhary, District Mohindergarh. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file. Respondent no. 2 – complainant Bimla lodged FIR alleging that power of attorney dated 14.6.2002 on her behalf was prepared in favour of own brother Durga Parshad by impersonating. Complainant's sister Gindori impersonated the complainant for execution of the power of attorney. On the basis of power of attorney, Durga Parshad sold complainant's land vide sale deed dated 10.5.2010. Counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that the petitioner is one of the two witnesses of the power of attorney and he identified the executant at the asking of Durga Parshad. Counsel for the petitioner referred to affidavit Annexure P/1 affirmed by the complainant in Criminal Misc. No. M-33789 of 2011 -2- this regard. Counsel for the petitioner also pointed out that in the FIR itself, the complainant has exonerated Gindori (who impersonated as complainant) by mentioning that she being illiterate lady was misled by her brother Durga Parshad that power of attorney was being prepared for the purpose of loan only. Learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Ishwar Singh, contended that the petitioner also identified Gindori as Bimla at the time of execution of power of attorney. I have carefully considered the rival contentions. Ram Singh, Lambardar also identified the executant at the time of execution of power of attorney, in addition to identification by the petitioner. Neither Gindori the impersonator nor Ram Singh Lambardar has been arrested. On the other hand, complainant herself exonerated the present petitioner vide affidavit Annexure P/1 affirming that the petitioner was made to make wrong identification by Durga Parshad and Ram Singh Lambardar. Petitioner is not the beneficiary of the power of attorney. Keeping in view all the circumstances but without meaning to express any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition for anticipatory bail is allowed. In the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer subject to the conditions specified in section 438 (2) Cr.P.C. The petitioner shall join the investigation as and when required by the police. Presently, the petitioner is directed to join investigation on 22.12.2011 at 10.00 AM and continue to do so as and when required by the police. ( L.N. Mittal ) December 12, 2011 Judge 'dalbir'