CRM-M-20833 of 2011 (O&M) - 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-20833 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 08.09.2011 Mam Chand . . .Petitioner Versus State of Haryana . . . Respondent ***** CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN ***** Present: Mr.Pardeep Bajaj, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Vikas Malik, AAG, Haryana. Mr.Adarsh Jain, Advocate, for the complainant. ***** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J (ORAL) This is a petition for bail in a pending trial case registered vide FIR No.24 dated 31.1.2011 under Sections 420, 467, 471 & 120B of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’) at Police Station Tigaon, Faridabad. As per case set up by the prosecution, the petitioner being the Chowkidar of the village had actively participated in bogus service upon the defendants in the Civil Suit No.291 so that plaintiffs therein could take an ex parte decree. It is submitted that the plaintiffs namely Surender and Giraj had filed CRM-M-18976 of 2011 under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘Cr.P.C.) which has been allowed by this Court vide its order dated 8.8.2011. He further submits that the petitioner is in custody since 13.5.2011 and the challan has already been presented. The plaintiffs had filed a Civil Suit for declaration claiming occupancy rights over the land in dispute in which the defendants therein were proceeded against ex parte on the basis of alleged bogus report of the petitioner. It is argued by learned counsel for the respondent/State assisted by learned counsel for the complainant that the petitioner had taken sizeable share of the amount which has been received from sale of the land in dispute which has been decreed in favour of the plaintiffs. He further submits that the ex parte CRM-M-20833 of 2011 (O&M) - 2 - decree has been passed by the learned Civil Court only on the basis of the manipulated report of service by the petitioner. I have heard both the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. Since the plaintiffs, who are the main beneficiaries of the ex parte decree, granted anticipatory bail by this Court on 8.8.2011 and the petitioner who happens to be a Chowkidar though allegedly shared the amount of sale proceedings is praying for regular bail being is in custody since 13.5.2011 especially when challan has already been presented, I find that he deserves concession of bail especially when he is neither a previous convict nor any case is pending against him. Hence, the present petition is hereby allowed. (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) SEPTEMBER 08, 2011 JUDGE Vivek