CRM No. M-8182 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM No. M-8182 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: 22.02.2011 Kulwant Singh and another ....Petitioners Versus State of Punjab ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present: - Ms. H.K. Dhillon, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Anmol Rattan Singh Sidhu, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. R.K. Chugh, Advocate, for the complainant. Mr. K.D. Sachdeva, Addl. A.G., Punjab. 1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? ***** ALOK SINGH, J (ORAL) This is an application seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.320 dated 20.12.2009, under Sections 454/420/467/468/471/120-B of the Indian Penal Code, Police Station Division No.5, Civil Lines, Ludhiana. This Court vide order dated 22.3.2010 has directed to release the petitioners on interim bail. Mr. K.D. Sachdeva, learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab, on the instructions of ASI Sudagar, states that petitioners although have joined the investigation, but they have not handed over the title deeds said to be executed in favour of accused Nos.7 and 8 from whom present accused/petitioners allegedly have purchased the property. Learned Additional Advocate General states that now Investigating Officer shall try to obtain the original title deeds available CRM No. M-8182 of 2010 (O&M) -2- in the office of Sub Registrar and thereafter shall obtain the report of the fingerprint and handwriting expert/scientific laboratory. He further states that executants of the title deeds in favour of accused Nos.7 and 8 predecessor-in-interest of the present accused are not traceable. He states that photographs of the executants on the title deeds in favour of accused Nos. 7 and 8 shall also be obtained from the office of the Sub Registrar. Mr. Anmol Rattan Singh Sidhu, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. R.K. Chugh, learned counsel for the complainant, vehemently argued that since title deeds of the predecessor-in-interest of the present accused have not been recovered, hence custodial interrogation is required. However, Mr. Sidhu very fairly stated that if investigation is done as suggested by learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab, and thereafter executants of the title deeds are not found or traced then custody of the petitioners shall be sought for further interrogation. Considering totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, petition is allowed. Order dated 22.3.2010 is made absolute, subject to the conditions mentioned under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. However, it is clarified that petitioners shall keep on co-operating in the investigation and if they fail to do so Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to get the bail cancelled. (Alok Singh) Judge February 22, 2011 R.S.