KARUNA BHARDWAJ Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking prearrest bail in a case registered against the petitioner under Sections 406, 420, 448, 465, 467, 468, 471, 474, 120-B IPC at Police Station N.R.I. Jalandhar, District Jalandhar, vide FIR No.3 dated 13 th February, 2012.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. The entire dispute is of civil nature. Power of attorney and agreement were duly executed by the complainant. She cannot now turn around and accuse the petitioner of having committed fraud and forgery. This apart petitioner is ready to cooperate with the investigating agency. She is, thus, entitled to concession of pre-arrest bail.

(3.) Learned State counsel has opposed the prayer. He submitted that a power of attorney was given by the complainant to husband of the petitioner for conducting her cases. She being NRI, certain blank papers were also handed over to him. Accused, however, misused the same and forged certain documents. According to him, husband of the petitioner is absconding. In order to unravel modus operandi of crime custodial interrogation of the accused is necessary. Learned counsel appearing for the complainant has made submissions on similar lines. He has added that certain blank papers were handed over to petitioner's husband being a lawyer. However, same were misused. An agreement to sell concerning property of the complainant and a rent note were forged. Later accused claimed that original documents were lost and a DDR has been lodged regarding the same. He submits that an NRI had been duped at the hands of the petitioner. He is, thus, not entitled to concession of bail. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and given careful thought to the facts of the case.