Criminal Misc. No. M-18993 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-18993 of 2010 Date of decision : 13.07.2010 Naveen kumar ....Petitioner V/s State of Haryana ....Respondent BEFORE : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. Rakesh Nehra, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Gaurav Dhir, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana. RAJAN GUPTA J. (ORAL) This is a petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking pre-arrest bail in a case registered against the petitioner vide FIR No. 196 dated 10.06.2010 under Sections 420, 467, 468 & 471 IPC at Police Station City Bahadurgarh, District Jhajjar. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner has no role to play in the commission of crime as land of Balmukand measuring three kanals and four marlas was sold to mother of the petitioner. According to learned counsel, the mother of the petitioner got this land for consideration (Rs. 6,30,000/-) and paid 90,000/- as registration fees. He submits that only allegation against the petitioner is that he was an attesting witness to the sale-deed, thus, petitioner deserves to be granted the concession of pre-arrest bail. The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned State counsel. He submits that the alleged GPA holder Narain Dass was a Criminal Misc. No. M-18993 of 2010 2 fictitious person and there is no evidence to show that said Narain Dass actually exists. He submits that entire transaction is a bogus transaction. According to learned counsel, the petitioner was the main person instrumental in getting the sale entered in name of his mother and in getting mutation sanctioned in respect thereof. He submits that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required for the purpose of unravelling the entire modus operandi of the crime. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and given careful thought to the facts of the case. It is evident that as per the allegations, petitioner was the witness to registered sale-deed No. 9465 dated 23.03.2010 wherein mother of the petitioner was shown as owner. The photograph of the petitioner as an attesting witness is also borne on the sale-deed. The investigating agency appears to be in dark about the person Narain Dass, who is alleged to be holding a general power of attorney from Balmukand. Under the circumstances, I am of the considered view that custodial interrogation of the petitioner may be required for taking the investigation to its logical end. There is no merit in the petition. The same is hereby dismissed. July 13, 2010 (RAJAN GUPTA) Ajay JUDGE