JUDGMENT
M.L. Singhal, J.
1. Through criminal Mis. Petition No.25956-M of 2001 Rajinder Kumar-petitioner has prayed for the grant of anticipatory bail to him and through criminal misc. Petition No.23064-M of 2001, Jaswinder Singh Petitioner has prayed for the grant of anticipatoiy bail to him in case FIR No. 126 dated 21.5.2001 registered under Sections 419/420/463/467/468/471/471A/120B of the Indian Penal Code at PS Division No. 4, Jalandhar.
2. By means of this order, both these criminal misc. petitions shall be disposed of. Facts:-
3. The prosecution case in brief is that Jaswant Singh is the only son of Sardar Ajit Singh who was owner of land measuring 41 kanals 11 marlas and 78 sq. feet in the revenue estate of village Kingra. He died on 4.2.1998 Ajit Singh was resident of village Kingra. During his life time in the year, 1996, Ajit Singh had given two general power of attorney to S. Atam Parkash Singh s/o Aya Singh resident of Jalandhar authorising him to sell his land situated in village Kingra. S. Atam Parkash Singh did not sell that land during the life time of Ajit Singh. On 29.07.1995 Ajit Singh had executed a registered will in favour of his son Jaswant Singh regarding his whole movable and immovable property. On 18.03.1998, i.e., after the death of Ajit Singh, Jaswant Singh got mutation entered on the basis of said will at No.11016 with Rajinder Kumar Halwa Patwari. He (Jaswant Singh) became absolute heir of the whole of the property of his father. Rajinder Kumar Patwari, did not get mutation entered in his favour. Jaswant Singh requested him many times to get the mutation entered and mutate the property in his name but with the intention to grab their property, Rajinder Kumar Patwari, in connivance with S. Atam Parkash Singh on the basis of General Power of Attorneys which had been given by Ajit Singh in his life time to him (S. Atam Parkash Singh) got executed special power of attorney in favour of Jaswinder Singh s/o Natha Singh from Atam Parkash Singh. On the basis of that special power of attorney, Jaswinder Singh executed two sale deeds, one with regard to 4 kanals 8 marlas in favour of Bimla Kapur wife of
late Sh. B.S. Kapur r/o A-92 and the other with regard to 4 kanals 8 marlas in favour of R.S. Ohri son of Natha Singh and Vipan Ohri s/o R.S. Ohri. They got the mutation sanctioned on the basis of those sale deeds from Rajinder Kumar Patwari,by cancelling the mutation No. 11016 entered on the basis of that will. Power of attorney executed by his father Ajit Singh in favour of S. Atam Parkash Singh could not remain in force after the death of Ajit Singh which took place on 4.2.1998. After the death of Ajit Singh, Anil Chopra in connivance with Gursharan Singh, Baldev Singh- the alleged witnesses of the un-registered will dated 17.3.1997 showing Jaswant Singh son of Ajit Singh, Baldev Singh and Gursharan Singh as the attesting witnesses of the same. Accused Rajinder Kumar again entered mutation No. 11942 of 13.9.1999 with regard to the inheritance of said Ajit Singh on the basis of the un-registered will and mutation was sanctioned in favour of Anil Chopra on 29.9.1999, Jaswant Singh, on the basis of registered will in his favour requested Rajinder Kumar Patwari, to obtain sanction of mutation in his name. In this regard he submitted application to Deputy Commissioner, Jalandhar who sent the same to Rajinder Kumar through post. Rajinder Kumar Patwari in connivance with Anil Chopra, Atma Parkash Singh and Jaswinder Singh grabbed his property and caused him loss and did not entertain the application which had been given to Deputy Commissioner, Jalandhar for sanction of the mutation. Rajinder Kumar Patwari after conniving with Anil Chopra son of Ram Chander hatched conspiracy on 17.3.1997 and got a forged Will from Ajit Singh which was got written by Rakesh Kumar Sharma Deed Writer, Jalandhar in favour of Anil Chopra and after putting photo of Ajit Singh and by putting some other person in his place put forged signatures of Ajit Singh in Urdu and by putting some other person, in place of Jaswant Singh by putting his (Jaswant Singh) forged signatures in English and thereafter by conniving with the officers of revenue department after the death of Ajit Singh after about two years on 3.5.1999 after getting unregistered will registered under Section 40 of the Registration Act got mutation entered and sanctioned. Baldev Singh son of Lachhman Singh r/o Kingra and Gursharan Singh Numberdar put their attestation and verified the will. Besides this, on the basis of power of attorneys given by Ajit Singh in his life time in favour of Atma Parkash Singh son of Aya Singh, Rajinder Kumar Patwari got executed special/power of attorney in favour of Jaswinder Singh r/o Mohalla No. 31, House No. 1, Jalandhar Cantt. and Jaswinder Singh after the death of Ajit Singh executed two sale deeds in respect of land measuring 4 kanals 8 marlas in favour of Smt. Bimla Kapur and 4 kanals 8 marlas in favour of R.S. Ohri and Vipan Ohri and Rajinder Kumar Patwari after conniving with Anil Chopra, Baldev Singh, Gursharan Singh Numbardar and Rakesh Kumar Sharma Deed-writer prepared forged will on behalf of Ajit Singh got willed away land measuring 41 kanals 11 marlas 78 sq. feet in favour of Anil Chopra.
4. It was submitted by the learned counsel for Sh. Rajinder Kumar Halqa Patwari that during his life time, Ajit Singh had given six power of attorneys in respect of various pieces of land. He had given one power of attorney No. 5907 dated 22.2.1996 with regard to 6 kanals of land to Sunil Kumar and Ravi Katyal. He had given one power of attorney No. 5907 dated 22.2.1996 with regard to 6 kanals of land to Sunil Kumar and Ravi Katyal. He had given power of attorney No. 5699 dated 26.7.1997 with regard to 6 kanals of land to Sunil Kumar and Ravi Katyal. He had given power of attorney No. 5672 dated 8.10.1996 with regard to 11 kanals 8 marlas of land to Mohan Jit Saini, power of attorney No. 5908 dated 17.10.1996 with regard to 1 kanals 12 marlas of land and power of attorney No. 7641 dated 16.12.1996 with regard to 11 kanals 11 marlas of land had been given to Ajit Singh Sethi and Mandeep Kaur, Ravi Katyal and Atam Parkash Singh respectively. These power of attorneys were duly registered in the office of Sub Registrar, Jalandhar. It was submitted that there was agreement to sell executed by Ajit Singh regarding receipt of full and final consideration. As such there was no question of commission of any fraud. It was submitted that Jaswant Singh had levelled false allegation with a view to pressuring the vendees and the holders of power of attorneys in whose favour agreement to sell had been executed. It was submitted that even according to the complainant, his father Ajit Singh had executed agreement to sell a specific portion of land in favour of Atam Parkash Singh son of Aya Singh and had also executed general power of attorney in his favour. It was submitted that actually, agreement to sell on receipt of full and final sale consideration was executed by Ajit Singh in favour of Anil Chopra, Sunil Kumar and Directors of M/s Saint Soldiers Property and Industry Limited, New Delhi and general power of attorneys were executed and possession of land was delivered in favour of vendees and only sale deed was left to be got registered. It was submitted that subsequently sale deeds were executed on the basis of the said general power of attorneys and special attorneys in terms of the said general power of attorneys in favour of Atam Parkash Singh. It was submitted that the vendees have already constructed palatial building 5 years ago and this fact is in the knowledge of the complainant and further said agreements to sell were also attested by him. It was submitted that Ajit Singh had also executed a will qua the said land in favour of the Managing Directors of the said concern M/s Saint Soldiers Property and Industry Limited. It was submitted that the petitioner who is a patwari does not figure anywhere except entering in the concerned mutations in the register which he was required to do so part of his duty and he could not refuse to perform his duty. It is submitted that sanctioning of the mutation is up to the concerned Naib Tehsildar of Tehsildar. It was submitted that he has been named as an accused with a view to pressuring him. It was submitted that regarding sanctioning of mutation on the basis of sale deed allegedly by the complainant-Jaswant Singh had already been decided by the Collector, Jalandhar and the appeal wherein the sale deeds and mutation qua the sale deeds have been up-held and mutation regarding the alleged will is pending before the Assistant Collector Grade-I. It was submitted that the signatures of Jaswant Singh and Ajit Singh on the disputed documents were got examined from Handwriting Expert Shri Fateh Chand and the signatures on the will as well as general attorneys given by Ajit Singh on sale agreement were found to be that of Ajit Singh. It was submitted that relevant record is already in possession of the police or the vendees concerned. Petitioner is a Government employee and no recovery is to be effected from him and general power of attorneys were executed and possession of land was delivered in favour of vendees and only sale deed was left to be got registered.
5. It was submitted that sanctioning of the mutation was up to the concerned Naib Tehsildar or Tehsildar. It was submitted that he has been named as an accused with a view to pressuring him.
6. As regards Jaswinder Singh, it was submitted that in fact Ajit Singh had executed various general power of attorneys in respect of his land situated in village Kingra in favour of Sunil Kumar, Ravi Katyal and Atam Parkash Singh. The said attorneys were executed for consideration and Ajit Singh had received full and final consideration. Agreements were in the name of Saint Soldiers Property and Industry Limited. On the basis of general power of attorneys, Atam Parkash Singh entered into an agreement to sell with Phuman Singh, Surinder Singh and Jaswinder Singh in respect of land measuring 8 kanals 16 marlas and vide the said agreement Atam Parkash Singh received full and final sale consideration and on the same day Atam Parkash Singh executed a special power of attorney in favour of Puman Singh, Surinder Kalra and Jaswinder Singh bearing No. 8150 dated 27.12.1996 duly registered before Sub Registrar, Jalandhar on 31.12.1996 and the same was in the knowledge of Ajit Singh and the members of his family. By executing special power of attorney and agreement to sell, Atam Parkash Singh sold away the land measuring 8 Kanals 16 marlas, out of khasra numbers mentioned in the agreement and attorney and Jaswinder Singh, Surinder Kalra and Phuman Singh became the lawful and absolute owners of land measuring 8 kanals 16 marlas. The possession of the land was also delivered to Jaswinder Singh, Surinder Kalra and Phuman Singh during the life time of Ajit Singh. It was submitted that after that boundary wall was raised by Jaswinder Singh during the life time of Ajit Singh and he and his LRs never interrupted the possession of Jaswinder Singh. It was submitted that Jaswinder Singh enjoyed the possession for about 1-1/2 years, during which period, Jaswant Singh never interruped his possession. Jaswinder Singh on the basis of special power of attorney and agreement executed two sale deeds bearing Nos. 5238 in favour of R.S. Ohri and Vipan Ohri and other sale deed bearing No. 4012 in favour of Bimla Kapoor and then the possession was also handed over to them. R.S. Ohri and Vipan Ohri constructed a big kothi on the land measuring 4 kanals 8 marlas and Bimla Kapoor raised further construction and both are enjoying possession as true owners. It was submitted that everything was the knowledge of Jaswant Singh and he is living close to the said property. Mutations incorporating the two sale deeds were entered on 20.8.1999, compared on 24.8.1999 and sanctioned on 24.8.1999 by Sh. Parveen Chhibber (Circle Revenue Officer). It was submitted that Jaswinder Singh has rightly sold the land of the above two sale deeds as true owner. It was submitted that the death of Ajit Singh was not in the knowledge of Jaswinder Singh. It was not necessary for Jaswinder Singh to know about the death of Ajit Singh as he exercised his power as attorney. It was submitted that it is a proved case that Ajit Singh received sale considering during his life time. It was the duty of LRs of Ajit Singh to inform about the death of Ajit Singh. In the revenue record no where it was shown that Ajit Singh had died on 4.2.1998. Jaswinder Singh has signed as a witness on Annexures P-3, P-5 and P-6 and now legal heirs of Ajit Singh including Jaswant Singh are black-mailing the petitioner-Jaswinder Singh. At the time of the sale deeds executed by Jaswinder Singh, he had verified the revenue record and there was no entry regarding the death of Ajit Singh. Out of this land Jaswinder Singh has also purchased land measuring 17 marlas 137 sq. feet for a sum of Rs.4,63,000/- vide registered sale deed dated 6.9.1999. It was submitted that wife and daughter of Ajit Singh have filed two civil suits for declaration regarding the same property. Both these suits are pending in the Court of Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Jalandhar. It was submitted that when civil and criminal cases are pending between the parties regarding the same subject matter, it would be too early to say that the documents are forged.
7. Ajit Singh had executed general power of attorneys during his life time in the year 1996. He died on 4.2.1998. As such those power of attorneys lapsed on 4:2.1998. Atam Parkash Singh gave special power of attorney to Jaswinder Singh on the basis of general power of attorney he was holding.
8. According to the prosecution Ajit Singh had executed will dated 29.7.1993 in favour of his son Jaswant Singh. Mutation No. 11016 was entered in the mutation register by Rajinder Kumar Patwari-accused. This mutation was entered on 18.3.1998 but it was rejected in default on 27.10.1998. After the death of Ajit Singh, Anil Chopra in connivance with Baldev Singh etc.- the alleged witnesses of un-registered will-fabricated and procured un-registered will dated 17.3.1997 showing Jaswant Singh son of Ajit Singh and Baldev Singh as attesting witnesses. Accused Rajinder Kumar again entered mutation No. 11942 with regard to the inheritance of said Ajit Singh on the basis of un-registered will in favour of Anil Chopra on 29.9.1999. Ram Lubhaya-Field Kanungo checked these mutations. As per report of Fateh Chand, Handwriting and Finger Print Expert, these signatures of Ajit Singh-testator are different from his standard signatures. Similarly the disputed signatures of Jaswant Singh-the alleged attesting witness of said unregistered will did not tally with his standard signatures. According to the prosecution, signatures of the testator and that of Jaswant Singh do not tally with their standard signatures. According to the prosecution will said will said to have been executed by Ajit Singh in favour of Anil Chopra cannot be said to be genuine. According to the prosecution, Rajinder Kumar-Patwari is the root cause of all this trouble. If he had produced mutation No. 11016 soon after for being sanctioned after notice to all the heirs of Ajit Singh, this difficulty would not have arisen. According to the prosecution what the
Patwari did was that he took no action on the mutation No. 11016 and entered mutation on the basis of un-registered will in favour of Anil Chopra which was a forged will. It was submitted that Ajit Singh had executed a registered will in favour of his son Jaswant Singh dated 29.7.1993. According to the prosecution, Patwari should have given effect to that will.
9. There was complaint to the Deputy Commissioner, Jalandhar regarding this scam which was handed over to Krishan Kumar the then DRO Jalandhar for enquiry, It was found after a thorough enquiry that land measuring 8 kanals situated in city Jalandhar was very costly and it was sold in an unlawful manner by Jaswinder Singh and Atma Parkash Singh and prime accused. Land measuring 4 kanals 8 marlas was sold by Jaswinder Singh vide sale deed No. 5238 dated 30.7.1998 to his own relation.
10. R.S. Ohri is Natha Singh’s brother, Vipan Ohri is Natha Singh’s nephew, Jaswinder Singh is son of Natha Singh. On 3.7.1998 and 30.7.1998 Jaswinder Singh swore affidavits before Sub Registrar that Ajit Singh was alive which was false affidavit. After death of Ajit Singh, Jaswinder Singh had no business to execute sale deeds because the power of attorney in his favour if any lapsed on 4.2.1998. In both the sale deeds Jaswinder Singh got scribed that the real owner i.e., Ajit Singh is alive and the power of attorney in his favour and also the power of attorney in favour of his principal Atma Parkash Singh is subsisting.
11. In these sale deeds no consideration was paid to the vendor. It is recited that sale consideration has been paid to Phuman Singh son of Beant Singh. Rajinder Kumar Patwari entered mutation No. 11942 on the basis of second will although he had known that mutation No. 11016 had already been entered on the basis of registered will dated 29.7.1993 in favour of Jaswant Singh.
12. According to the prosecution Rajinder Kumar Patwari and Ram Lobhaya-Kanungo entered and sanctioned mutation in favour of the alleged vendees without giving notice to Jaswant Singh, his mother and sister who were legal heirs of Ajit Singh. Rajinder Kumar Patwari got mutation No. 11016 pending and got it rejected in default on 27.10.1998. Assuming that the general power of attorney in favour of Atam Parkash Singh was valid, that authorised him to deal with his land, Jaswinder Singh could not have dealt with the land measuring 8 kanals 16 marlas. Rajinder Kumar Patwari entered mutation on the basis of an in-registered will in favour of Anil Chopra. The said mutation was entered by the Patwari without notice to the heirs of Ajit Singh. According to the prosecution, Rajinder Kumar Patwari played the key role in this land scam.
13. In this episode the land involved is very precious, which is said to have been dealt with in a clandestine manner by Jaswinder Singh etc. in connivance with Rajinder Kumar Patwari Halqa and others. I do not think anticipatory bail can be allowed to Rajinder Kumar Patwari and Jaswinder Singh. Anticipatory bail is refused to both of them.
Both these criminal misc. petitions stand dismissed.