Crl. Misc. No.M-11521 of 2010 Present:- Mr.B.D.Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.T.S.Salana, DAG, Punjab. Mr. Vivek Salathia, Advocate for the complainant. **** Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner seeks regular bail in a case registered against him on 18.08.2009 for the offences under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, Police Station 'B' Division, Amritsar, District Amritsar. The FIR in the case has been registered on the complaint of Mohan Singh son of Karnail Singh against Balwinder Kaur, Bachittar Singh and Naresh Chander Sharma (deed writer). It is alleged that on the basis of one false registered sale deed plot of Khasra No.2259 min situated in the area of Sultanwind sub-urban abadi, Gobind Nagar, Tehsil and District Amritsar was sold by one lady who impersonated as Balwinder Kaur. The said lady was introduced to the complainant-Mohan Singh as Balwinder Kaur by the petitioner-Manjeet Singh. The sale deed was witnessed by Bachittar Singh and was scribed by Naresh Chander Sharma (deed writer). A sale deed dated 03.12.1999 was shown to Mohan Singh (complainant) which was in favour of one Balwinder Kaur in respect of land comprised in Khasra No.2259. However, in terms of a subsequent sale deed dated 17.02.2009 land comprised in Khasra No.2259 min is shown to have been transferred but according to the complainant, actual possession of Khasra No.2236 was given to him which is in the name of one Satnam Kaur. Thereafter, it came to the knowledge of the complainant that the sale deed dated 03.12.1999 was in fact in favour of one Parkash Kaur and Khasra Number of the same was 649. In this manner, the name Crl. Misc. No.M-11521 of 2010 -2- of Parkash Kaur was changed to Balwinder Kaur and Khasra No.649 of the same was changed to 2259. The land comprised in Khasra No.2259 had in fact been sold on 04.07.2004 and the purchaser of the same was the owner of the land. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and he is neither a Property Dealer nor he has any direct or indirect concern with the sale deed in question. Learned counsel for the State and the complainant have submitted that the petitioner is the person who produced a lady and represented her to be Balwinder Kaur who was the owner of the plot in question. The said Balwinder Kaur has not been traced out till date, therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of the bail. Petitioner-Manjit Singh @ Bittu is a Property Dealer and has been charge-sheeted (Challaned) by the Police. The allegations against the petitioner are that he along with Naresh Chander Sharma (deed writer) and Pappu in connivance with each other had produced a fake lady in place of Balwinder Kaur and committed a fraud with the applicant-Mohan Singh for an amount of Rs.6,06,000/-. The petitioner was arrested in the case on 25.11.2009 and since then he is in custody. The trial in the case is likely to take time. The prosecution has to establish its case by leading evidence. After giving my thoughtful consideration to the matter and the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 25.11.2009 and the prosecution has yet to establish its case by leading evidence and the trial in the case which is triable by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, is likely to take time. Besides, further incarceration of the petitioner would not serve any purpose. In the facts and circumstances, the petitioner on his furnishing Crl. Misc. No.M-11521 of 2010 -3- personal bond and surety to the satisfaction of the learned trial Magistrate shall be admitted to bail. (S.S.SARON) August 03, 2010 JUDGE Sukhpreet