LAWS(P&H)-2012-11-361

RAJ RANI Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

Decided On November 20, 2012
RAJ RANI Appellant
V/S
STATE OF PUNJAB Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Tersely, the facts & material, culminating in the commencement, relevant for deciding the instant petition for anticipatory bail and emanating from the record, are that, according to the prosecution, the petitioner, her husband Avtar Singh and their other coaccused have formed a group of land grabbers, used to sell the property of other persons and fraudulently received the earnest money. It was claimed that although Avtar Singh was not the owner of the property in dispute, but he fraudulently executed an agreement dated 2.4.2012 (Annexure P2) to sell the land of other person measuring 243 Kanals 15 Marlas to complainant Joginder Singh son of Gian Singh (for brevity "the complainant"). The complainant paid Rs. 1 crore to petitioner and her husband, in lieu of earnest money. Subsequently, the complainant came to know that he has been cheated by the accused as Avtar Singh was not the owner, he executed an agreement to sell with respect to land of some other actual owner and deceived him. Petitioner and her husband fraudulently received one crore rupees as earnest money from him.

(2.) Leveling a variety of allegations and narrating the sequence of events, in all, the complainant claimed that petitioner, her husband and other accused have hatched a criminal conspiracy, cheated him, prepared a false agreement to sell the land of other person and received the earnest money of Rs. 1 crore from him. In the background of these allegations and in the wake of complaint of complainant, the present case was registered against the accused, by virtue of FIR No.91 dated 10.5.2012, for the commission of offences punishable under sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC by the police of Police Station Phillaur, District Jalandhar in the manner depicted here-in-above.

(3.) Having exercised and lost his right, before Additional Sessions Judge, now the petitioner has preferred the instant petition for anticipatory bail in the present case, invoking the provisions of section 438 Cr.PC.