DAVINDER NAGI Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The matter has been taken up through Videoconferencing on account of outbreak of pandemic COVID-19.

(2.) The allegations against accused-petitioner Davinder Nagi, a practising lawyer, in this first anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in case FIR No. 56 dated 23.9.2020, under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, Police Station Sector 17, HUDA, Jagadhri are levelled by complainant Ramesh Kumar Verma claiming to be a social activist. In his written complaint, the complainant states that the petitioner who also is a licenced Notary Public along with his co-accused Ram Saran is alleged to have while the complainant was on the panel of District Legal Services Authority, Yamuna Nagar, he learnt that after stealing his letter pad a legal notice was prepared by the accused which was served upon the Haryana State Legal Services Authority, Panchkula, Haryana and that the affidavit of the complainant was got attested from the petitioner Devinder Nagi against the rules and in contravention of ethics of the profession.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner inter-alia contends that the petitioner is an advocate discharging function of Notary Public as well and has merely attested the affidavit regarding which he is not supposed to vouch for the correctness of the averments made therein. It is argued that the petitioner has no role to play in the commission of the offence and which is nothing but rivalry between members of the Local Bar Association and that nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner.