Crl.M.No.M-26188 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl.M.No.M-26188 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision:September 15, 2010 Baldev Singh .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr.H.S.Dhindsa, Advocate for the petitioner. ...... RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) Crl.M.No.46725 of 2010 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Crl.M.No.M-26188 of 2010 The present petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.61, dated 23.6.2010, under Sections 420,120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Sadar, Kapurthala. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the whole record carefully, including the order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kapurthala, vide which application filed on behalf of the present petitioner for anticipatory bail was dismissed. Brief allegations against the petitioner are that Arjan Singh, father of present petitioner-accused- Baldev Singh mortgaged the land in dispute with Central Bank of India in the year 1987 as a security for loan of Rs.70,000/-. Due to default in making the payment, a civil suit was filed by the Bank which was decreed on 3.6.1993. In execution, the property in dispute was attached as per Court order. The same was put to auction. In open auction, complainant Malkiat Singh was the highest bidder. The Crl.M.No.M-26188 of 2010 (O&M) -2- auction was also confirmed by the Court. Sale certificate was also issued on 10.11.2007. Even applicant-accused received the residuary amount of sale consideration after clearing the loan of the bank from the Court. Hence, the entire fact was in the knowledge of the petitioner-accused. Sale certificate was also issued in favour of the complainant. Despite that he sold the said land in favour of co-accused Mohinder Singh. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner- accused that later on an agreement was executed in his favour by the complainant and that a civil suit was also filed by the petitioner against the complainant and when sale-deed was not got executed by the complainant, he sold the property in dispute to co-accused Mohinder Singh. There are serious allegations against the petitioner-accused in committing the fraud upon the complainant who had purchased the land in dispute through the court in an open auction. Sale certificate was also issued in his name and hence, the present sale consideration was also withdrawn by the present petitioner-accused from the Court. Despite that he sold the land in dispute to co-accused Mohinder Singh, who is stated to be posted as DSP and related to the petitioner. Hence, it is not such a case in which extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner-accused. Rather, his custodial interrogation is necessary. Hence, in view of these facts, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition filed by petitioner- Baldev Singh for grant of anticipatory bail is, hereby, dismissed being devoid of any merit. 15.9.2010 (Ram Chand Gupta) meenu Judge