Mitter Pal vs State Of Haryana on 28 May, 2009

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                           AT CHANDIGARH


                Criminal Misc. No. M-14713 of 2009 (O&M)
                       Date of decision: 28th May, 2009

Mitter Pal

                                                                   ... Petitioner

                                    Versus

State of Haryana
                                                                 ... Respondent


CORAM:        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA

Present:      Mr. Parminder Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.


KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL)

Two of the co-accused, who were attesting witnesses to the

agreement to sell, had filed Criminal Misc. No. M-12204 of 2009. Same

was decided on 15th May, 2009 and the following order was passed:

“The present petition has been preferred under Section
438 Cr.P.C. seeking pre-arrest bail to the petitioners in case
FIR No. 312 dated 24.7.2008 registered at Police Station Civil
Lines, Karnal, under Sections 406, 420, 506, & 120-B IPC.

On 5.5.2009, this Court had passed the following order:-

“Counsel has submitted that in the present case,
complainant Anil Kadiyan is an Advocate. He had
entered in an agreement to sell with Lal Singh at the
instance of Mitter Pal. Counsel has submitted that
petitioners are only attesting witnesses to the
agreement to sell. The allegation that even though Lal
Singh had received the earnest money, had failed to
execute the agreement to sell, will not fasten the
Criminal Misc. No. M-14713 of 2009 (O&M) 2

petitioners with any criminal liability. Counsel has further
submitted that observations made in the impugned
order that the petitioners were witnesses to various
agreements to sell will not hold them liable for
commission of any criminal act.

Issue notice of motion for 15th May, 2009.
In the event of arrest, petitioners shall be
released on interim bail to the satisfaction of the
arresting officer. However, petitioners shall join
investigation as and when called for. Petitioners shall
abide by the conditions specified under Section 438(2)
Cr.P.C.”

Today, Mr. S.S. Patter, Senior Deputy Advocate
General, Haryana, has stated that on basis of first agreement
to sell, about 30 agreements to sell have been executed and
petitioners are party to the conspiracy to dupe various
persons.

Counsel for the State has stated that investigation will
be completed and final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. will
be submitted within 15 days from today.

Since the final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. will be
submitted within 15 days, petitioners are allowed to remain on
pre-arrest bail. However, thereafter, petitioners shall apply for
regular bail and the trial Court, taking into consideration the
evidence collected by the Investigating Agency, shall decide
the regular bail application on merits.

At this stage, it will not be appropriate to comment upon
merits of the case.

With the observations made above, the present petition
is disposed off.”

Criminal Misc. No. M-14713 of 2009 (O&M) 3

Petitioner is alleged to be one of the beneficiaries. No ground

is made to take a different view. Accordingly, the case of the petitioner is

disposed off in the same terms as in case of ‘Surjit Singh and another v.

State of Haryana’ Criminal Misc. No. M-12204 of 2009 decided on 15th

May, 2009.

[KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA]
JUDGE
May 28, 2009
rps