CRM-M No.20855 of 2011(O&M) ::1:: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 23.12.2011 1) CRM-M No.20855 of 2011 (O&M) Dharminder Singh ...... Petitioner vs. State of Punjab ...... Respondent 2) CRM-M No.33691 of 2011 (O&M) Baghel Singh ...... Petitioner vs. State of Punjab ...... Respondent *** CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI *** Present : Mr. Yogesh Goel, Advocate for the petitioner (in CRM-M No.20855 of 2011). Mr. Gurcharan Dass, Advocate for the petitioner (in CRM-M No.33691 of 2011). Mr. Sumeet Abrol, A.A.G., Punjab. *** AJAY TEWARI, J. (Oral) Both the petitions are connected and are being disposed of with common order. CRM-M No.20855 of 2011(O&M) ::2:: CRM-M No.20855 of 2011 has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.121 dated 18.08.2010 registered under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC at Police Station Division No.2, Ludhiana City. CRM-M No.33691 of 2011 has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.121 dated 18.08.2010 registered under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC at Police Station Division No.2, Ludhiana City. Mr. Gurcharan Dass, Advocate states that inadvertently in the prayer of the petition the date of the FIR has been wrongly mentioned as 18.08.2011 instead of 18.08.2010 and prays that the same may be corrected. Allowed as prayed for. The date of the FIR No.121 be read as 18.08.2010. The allegations are that one Rajinder Singh produced a false and fictious sale deed and took the loan from the complainant-Bank. The petitioners are those persons who identified the seller and the buyer at the time of the said sale deed. It is their argument that they had no knowledge that the sale deed was a fictious document because they only identified the persons as per documents. The petitioner Baghel Singh has been in custody since 11.07.2011 while the other petitioner Dharminder Singh is now on ad- interim anticipatory bail. The fact that the petitioners have only identified the persons has been accepted by the learned Assistant Advocate General on instructions from ASI Gurmeet Singh though he has pointed out that earlier two similar FIRs were lodged against the petitioner Dharminder Singh. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that even those cases related to identification of genuine persons and there was no knowledge that CRM-M No.20855 of 2011(O&M) ::3:: some persons had been wrongly identified. Keeping in view the entire conspectus, without commenting on the merits of the case, I deem it appropriate to allow these petitions. Ordered accordingly. In the event of arrest of the petitioner in CRM-M No.20855 of 2011, he shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer subject to the conditions envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. The petitioner in CRM-M No.33691 of 2011 shall be released on regular bail to the satisfaction of the C.J.M./Duty Magistrate, Ludhiana. A photocopy of this order be placed on the connected case. ( AJAY TEWARI ) December 23, 2011 JUDGE ashish