Cr.Misc. M 26266 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYNA AT CHANDIGARH. Cr.Misc. M 26266 of 2011 Date of decision:-3.11.2011 Rajpal Singh Petitioner vs. State of Haryana Respondent Present: Mr. Aman Pal, Advocate Ms. Sushma Chopra, Addl.A.G.Hry M.M.S.BEDI,J. The petitioner seeks the concession of pre-arrest bail in a case registered at the instance of Amarjit Kaur, resident of USA, alleging that on the basis of a forged power of attorney executed in favour of daughter of the petitioner, the complainant has been deprived of her property as the property has been sold on the basis of forged power of attorney. The petitioner is father of Kanta Ahlawat, who in connivance with Raju, Jagminder and his wife Paramjit Kaur has sold the property of Amarjit Kaur on the basis of forged power of attorney. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that as a matter of fact, Amarjit Kaur had in the year 2006, actually executed a power of attorney in favour of Kanta Ahlawat, which was attested by the petitioner but subsequently the said power of attorney of Amarjit Kaur fell in the hands of the property dealers, who manipulated another power of attorney by showing that the petitioner was an attesting witness. It is urged by counsel for the petitioner that as a matter of fact, the petitioner had never signed the forged power of attorney. Cr.Misc. M 26266 of 2011 2 I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and gone through the facts and circumstances of this case. The complainant Amarjit Kaur has been deprived of her property on the basis of power of attorney, which has been attested by none else but the petitioner, who happens to be the father of Kanta Ahlwata, who had used the said power of attorney. No ground is made out for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an old man suffering from paralysis . Counsel further submits that the petitioner has joined the investigation and that no recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. Merely joining of investigation does not confer any right to seek the concession of pre-arrest bail. The above said ground may constitute a good ground for regular bail in case the petitioner surrenders before the Illaqa Magistrate or the investigating officer. With the above said liberty the petition is dismissed. It will be appreciated in case the application for regular bail of the petitioner is decided expeditiously November 3 ,2011 ( M.M.S.BEDI ) TSM JUDGE