CRM-M-35992-2010 (O&M) [ 1 ] ::::::: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-35992-2010 (O&M) Date of decision:27.07.2011. Darshan Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr. R.S.Rai, Senior Advocate, with Mr. D.S.Brar, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. A.S.Rai, DAG, Punjab. Mr. Bipan Ghai, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Mandeep Kaushik, Advocate, for the complainant. ***** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. (ORAL) This petition is filed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a case registered vide FIR No.454 dated 03.11.2010, under Sections 419, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC at Police Station Division No.5 (Civil Lines), District Ludhiana. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that one Bachan Singh had four sons and one daughter. He executed a Will on 03.12.1974 of his property in favour of his wife Gurdial Kaur. She further executed a Will on 29.01.1979 in favour of her son Kuldeep Singh and her grandsons, namely, Harvinderpal Singh and Satwinderpal Singh sons of Darshan Singh (petitioner). The allegations are that after the death of Kuldeep Singh, the petitioner had got transferred share of Kuldeep Singh firstly in his favour by filing a forged affidavit and then it was further transferred in the name of his son. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present complaint has been filed by the daughter of the first wife of Darshan Singh (petitioner) who allegedly claimed her ownership over the property in dispute on the basis of an CRM-M-35992-2010 (O&M) [ 2 ] ::::::: unregistered Will dated 04.12.1974, which is alleged to have been executed by her grandfather Bachan Singh in her favour. He also submits that she had applied for sanctioning of mutation of the said property which was sanctioned in her favour up to the Collector, but the said order has been reversed by the learned Commissioner, Patiala Division. He further submits that there was a compromise between Darshan Singh and his first wife in terms of which he had already paid a sum of `25,00,000/- to her. He also submits that since the property in dispute has been transferred from Kuldeep Singh in favour of Swaraj Pal (his son), therefore, no motive could be attributed to the petitioner for any kind of cheating etc. at this stage. He further submits that the complainant had already filed a Civil Suit for seeking declaration of her right over the property in dispute on the basis of Will dated 04.12.1974 which is pending. He further submits that in terms of the order dated 08.12.2010, the petitioner has joined the investigation. Learned State Counsel submits that the signatures of Darshan Singh (petitioner) has been verified from the Forensic Science Laboratory, Punjab which have not been found to be of the petitioner on the said affidavit. Shri Bipan Ghai, learned Senior Counsel submits that the complainant, who is claiming her title over the property in dispute on the basis of an unregistered Will dated 04.12.1974, is being deprived of the fruits of the property. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I find it to be a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail and hence, the order dated 08.12.2010 passed by this Court is hereby made absolute subject to the conditions already mentioned therein. The petition shall stand disposed of. July 27, 2011 (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) vinod* JUDGE