RISHI KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rishi Kumar, the petitioner has sought pre-arrest bail in a case registered by way of FIR No. 111 dated 07.06.2012 at Police Station Chherretta, District Amritsar City, for an offence punishable under sections 420 and 120-B IPC.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is the son of the owner of the property named Pawan Bala. According to him, the entire mischief in this case was caused by one Jhujar Singh, who is a police official. Elaborating his submission, he has submitted that Pawan Bala applied for a loan of Rs.1,10,000/- from Bank of Baroda and Jhujar Singh stood guarantee for the same. According to him, in order to secure himself against the liability that may arise in connection with this loan, he obtained a general power of attorney in favour of his person named Kulwant Singh from Pawan Bala on 06.01.2010. He has submitted that on the basis of the said power of attorney, Kulwant Singh was made to execute a sale deed in respect of the property in question in favour of Jhujar Singh and family members. He has further submitted that thereafter, Pawan Bala sold her 3/4th share in the property to one Rajpreet Kaur and then she alongwith Rajpreet Kaur executed sale deed in respect of the entire property in favour of the petitioner and another person. According to him, even if the sale deed in favour of the petitioner is invalid, no harm is caused to Jhujar Singh, the complainant, in whose favour there is sale deed executed by Kulwant Singh, the attorney of Pawan Bala. He has further submitted that the petitioner has already joined the investigation and has cooperated with the same and his custodial interrogation is not required in this matter.

(3.) Learned State counsel, on the other hand, has admitted that the petitioner has joined the investigation. He has submitted that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required for investigation.