IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH,SHIMLA. 1.Cr.M.P.(M) No. 1041 2011 2.Cr.MP(M) No. 1042 of 2011. Date of decision: 20.12.2011. _______________________________________________________ 1..Cr.MP(M) No.1041 of 2011 Shri Vikramjeet Singh son of Late Shri Basant Ram, R/o village & Post Office Talwara, Tehsil Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, Himachal Pradesh, presently serving as Cashier-cum-Clerk in HP State Electricity Board presently posted at Kandraur, District Bilaspur, H.P. Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh. Through Secretary Home, Government of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla, Himachal Pradesh …. Respondent. ________________________________________________________ 2. Cr.MP(M) No.1042 of 2011 Shri Budhi Singh, S/o late Shri Sunder Ram, R/o village & Post Office Bhapral, Tehsil Ghumarwain, District Bilaspur, Himachal Pradesh, presently practicing as an Advocate at Civil Court Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, Himachal Pradesh ….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh. Through Secretary Home, Government of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla, Himachal Pradesh …. Respondent. Petition under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code for grant of pre arrest bail in FIR No.184/2011 dated 10.12.2011 at Po.lice Station, Ghumarwin, district Bilaspur, Himachal Pradesh under Sections 420, 465, 120-B of Indian Penal Code. _________________________________________________________ Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1No For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajiv Rai, Advocate with Mr. Paresh Sharma, Advocate. ( in both the petitions) For the Respondent : Ms.Ruma Kaushik, Addl.Advocate General. (in both the petitions) Kuldip Singh, J (Oral) This judgment shall dispose of Cr.MP(M) No.1041 of 2011 and Cr.MP(M) No.1042 of 2011, both having arisen out of FIR Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment?Yes No.184/2011 dated 10.12.2011 under Sections 420, 465, 120-B IPC registered at Police Station, Ghumarwin. Cr.MP(M) No.1041 of 2011 has been filed by Vikramjeet Singh and Cr.MP(M) No.1042 of 2011 by Budhi Singh. Cr.MP(M) No.1041 of 2011 2. It has been stated that petitioner has come to know that an FIR has been registered with the allegations that petitioner had gone to the house of complainant Pushpa Devi on 7.12.2011 for expressing condolence on the death of Onkar Chauhan who was colleague of petitioner and died in motor accident. It has been alleged that petitioner after expressing condolence on the death of the husband of complainant got some blank papers signed from the complainant on the pretext of providing some financial assistance to the complainant. However, on seeing some relatives of the complainant when petitioner was obtaining the signatures on blank papers, the petitioner fled away from the spot by leaving the signed papers and other documents of the department. The allegation is that petitioner got the papers signed from complainant at the instance of Budhi Singh petitioner in Cr.MP(M) No.1042 of 2011 who is practicing Advocate at Ghumarwin. 3. The petitioner is serving in the Electricity Board as Cashier-cum-Clerk, the deceased was colleague of the petitioner. On demand of the complainant, the petitioner had gone to the house of complainant on 7.12.2011 and handed over the papers to the complainant. The fabricated story has been concocted against the petitioner and Budhi Singh at the instance of some other advocate on account of conflicting professional interest. The petitioner is brother- in-law of Budhi Singh. Jaidev Katwal, Nand Lal brother of complainant had snatched the cashbook, ledger and ` 14,500/- from the petitioner and complaint to this effect has been lodged on 7.12.2011 with the police but no action has been taken on the complaint of the petitioner. It has been stated that no offence has been made out against the petitioner on the basis of allegations made in the complaint by the complainant. On account of registration of case, the petition is apprehending his arrest in the above case. 4. The petitioner is innocent. He has committed no offence, however he is ready to join the investigation and furnish bail bonds in accordance with the directions of this Court. The prayer has been made for releasing the petitioner on bail. Cr.MP(M) No.1042 of 2011 5. This petition has also been filed almost on the similar grounds as taken by the petitioner in Cr.MP(M) No.1041 of 2011. The status report has been filed in Cr.MP(M) No.1041 of 2011. It has been stated in the status report that on 7.12.2011 at about 10 a.m. Vikramjeet Singh Dhiman misled the widow, mother and children of deceased Onkar Chauhan and obtained their signatures on blank judicial papers at the instance of Budhi Singh Dhiman, Advocate. The accused are closely related to each other. On finding adverse atmosphere Vikramjeet Singh Dhiman fled away from the spot leaving behind his official record which was handed over to the Police Station, Ghumarwin. On this, case has been registered. It has been stated that it has come during investigation that Vikramjeet Singh Dhiman obtained signatures of mother, widow and children of deceased Onkar Chauhan on eight blank judicial papers and power of attorney in connivance with Budhi Singh Dhiman, Advocate. It has been alleged that those signed papers were to be used by the accused at different places. Vikramjeet Singh Dhiman disclosed that those papers were demanded by Jaidev brother of complainant and he handed over those papers to the complainant. The petitioner Budhi Singh has stated that Vikramjeet Singh Dhiman is his brother- in-law but he said that he never asked Vikramjeet Singh Dhiman to obtain signatures of complainant and his family members on blank papers and vakalatnama. The prayer has been made for rejecting the bail application. 6. I have heard both the sides and perused the police file. The allegations against the petitioners are that in connivance with each other they obtained the signatures of mother, widow and children of deceased Onkar Chauhan on blank papers. The complainant had apprehended that those blank papers were to be used by the petitioners later on. There is no allegation that those signed blank papers and power of attorney have been used by petitioners anywhere. In these circumstances, the petitioners have made out a case for grant of bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. 7. In view of above, both the bail applications being Cr.MP(M) No.1041 of 2011 and Cr.MP(M) No.1042 of 2011 are allowed, both the petitioners in the event of arrest are ordered to be released on bail in FIR No.184/2011 dated 10.12.2011 under Sections 420, 465, 120-B IPC registered at Police Station, Ghumarwin on furnishing their personal bonds in the sum of ` 25,000/- each with one surety each of the like amount to the satisfaction of Arresting Officer, with the condition that the petitioners shall continue to join the investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer and shall not hamper the investigation and tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner. 8. The observations made in the judgment are for disposal of the bail applications and it shall not be construed as expression of opinion on the merits of the case. Copy ‘Dasti’. December 20, 2011 (Kuldip Singh), (sks) Judge.