In the High Court for the States of Pun jab and Haryana at Chandigarh.
CRM M 15990 of 2009
Decided on July 13,2009.
Chander Mohan and another -- Petitioners
vs.
State of Haryana --Respondent
Present: Mr. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate,for the petitioners
Mr.Partap Singh,Sr.DAG,Haryana.
Mr.APS Deol,Sr.Advocate,with
Mr.Kuldeep Tiwari, Advocate, for the complainant.
Rakesh Kumar Jain, J:
This is a petition for anticipatory bail filed by the petitioners in
a case FIR No.108 dated 03.3.2009, registered under Sections 420,
467,468,471, 406,506,120-B IPC, at Police Station, City Thanesar.
In short, the case of the prosecution is that petitioner No.1
(Chander Mohan) posed himself to be the owner of 9 kanals 11 marlas of
land situated in village Samana Bahu, District Karnal, to the complainant
(Lakhbir Singh). An agreement was executed between them for a sum of
Rs.74,00,000/-. Later on, it was agreed that the land in question would be
sold to petitioner No.2. (Gaurav Bhardwaj) and a sum of Rs. 15,00,000/-
was paid by the complainant to petitioner No.1 towards earnest money,
Thereafter, a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- was paid by petitioner No.2. to the
complainant. As petitioner No.1 was not the owner of the property in
question, therefore, the complainant is stated to have been defrauded by
the petitioners.
Before coming to this Court, the petitioners had applied for
anticipatory bail vide bail application No.136 of 2009 before the learned
CRM M 15990 of 2000 -2-
Addl.Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra, which was dismissed vide order dated
2.6.2009.
Mr.Ashwani Talwar, learned counsel for the petitioners has
argued that it is astonishing that the complainant would give Rs.15,00,000/-
to petitioner No.1 and would not even get a document executed. It is
further submitted that similarly situated accused, namely Sanjay Gaur has
already been granted bail by this Court in Crl. Misc.No.9589 of 2009 vide
order dated 26.5.2009, therefore, the petitioners also deserve the concession
of bail on the principle of parity.
Mr.A.P.S. Deol, learned senior counsel appearing for the
complainant has submitted that the petitioner No.1 himself had executed
an agreement on 28.5.2008 in which he had admitted the receipt of
Rs.15,00,000/- from the complainant. Not only this, petitioner No.1 had
also endorsed on the said agreement that he would return the amount of
Rs.15,00,000/ + Rs.20,000/- by 30.8.2008. This writing was executed on
29.7.2008, but despite that the amount of Rs.15,00,000/- has not been
returned. It is further submitted that so far concession of bail in the case
of Sanjay Gaur is concerned, even in that case, Mr.Ashwani
Talwar,Advocate, appeared and stated as under:-
“Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that
only role attributed to the petitioner is that he had introduced
co-accused Chander Mohan to the complainant. The money in
question had also not been taken by the petitioner. Rather the
money had been paid by the complainant to co-accused
Chander Mohan. Learned counsel has further submitted that
CRM M 15990 of 2009 -3-there is no documentary evidence on record with regard to the
transaction made by the complainant”.
After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners, it is
prima facie apparent that Rs.15,00,000/- was paid by the complainant to
petitioner No.1 who in connivance with petitioner No.2 had committed the
offence. It is also worthwhile to mention here that vide order dated
8.6.2009, the petitioners were granted interim anticipatory bail and the
matter was adjourned to 2.7.2009. On that date, leaned counsel for the
petitioners was asked to return the amount of Rs.15,00,000/- to the
complainant, though, it was not so specifically recorded in the order and
the case was adjourned for 8.7.2009. On 8.7.2009, learned counsel for the
petitioners stated that he wanted to argue on the merits instead.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and keeping in
view the seriousness of the offence committed, I do not find it to be a fit
case to grant concession of anticipatory bail Hence the bail application is
hereby dismissed.
July 13,2009 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) RR Judge