Judgment:
CRM M- 38176 of 2012 [1].IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
Date of Decision: May 6”
1.
CRM M-38176 of 2012 (O&M) Kehar Singh and another …..Petitioners versus State of Punjab …..Respondent 2.
CRM M-40322 of 2012 (O&M) Sher Singh …..Petitioner versus State of Punjab …..Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE Mr.JUSTICE M.M.S.BEDI.
-.- Present:- Mr.A.S.Ahluwalia, Advocate for the petitioner in both cases.
Mr.Ankur Jain, AAG, Punjab.
-.- M.M.S.BEDI, J.(ORAL) CRM M- 38176 of 2012 [2].This order will dispose of two petitions bearing CRM M-38176 and M-40322 of 2012 As per the case of prosecution, complainant Satnam Singh paid a sum of Rs.18 lacs for purchase of property of petitioners and Beant Singh son of Sher Singh whereas petitioner Sher Singh had already sold his share in the property which was subject matter of the agreement of sale.
It is an admitted case of the prosecution that Kehar Singh and Gurmail Singh, petitioners have already returned the earnest money received by them.
They have also joined investigation.
So far as petitioner Sher Singh is concerned, counsel for him has made an attempt to justify the conduct of petitioner Sher Singh alleging that the property which had been sold by Sher Singh and Beant Singh was not the subject matter of the agreement of sale with the complainant.
I have considered the facts and circumstances of the case.
Petitioner Sher Singh was given an opportunity to handover a part of the earnest money received by him from the complainant by paying a bank draft of Rs.2 lacs.
Counsel for petitioner Sher Singh has expressed inability to pay that money to the complainant.
Without being influenced by the said conduct of the petitioner, it is sufficient to observe that petitioner Sher Singh had duped the complainant and persuaded him to part with earnest money with an objective to cheat him as he had already sold his share prior to entering into CRM M- 38176 of 2012 [3].an agreement of sale with the complainant.
No ground is made out to grant the concession of pre-arrest bail to petitioner Sher Singh.
Petition bearing CRM M-40322 of 2012 is hereby dismissed.
Interim order is vacated.
So far as petitioners Kehar Singh and Gurmail Singh are concerned, in view of they having already joined investigation and returned the earnest money to the complainant, they can be granted the concession of pre-arrest bail.
Petition bearing CRM M-38176 of 2012 is allowed and it is ordered that in case of arrest of petitioners Kehar Singh and Gurmail Singh, they will be released on bail to the satisfaction of the arresting officer subject to the conditions that they will join investigation as and when required by the police and that they will not tamper with the evidence or hamper the investigation in any manner.
May 6, 2013 (M.M.S.BEDI) sanjay JUDGE