DARPAN JAIN Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Darpan Jain, by way of Criminal Misc. No.M-6450 of 2013 and Gaurav Jain, by way of Criminal Misc. No. M-7627 of 2013 seek pre arrest bail in a case registered by way of FIR No.93 dated 10.12.2012 at Police Station Hariana, District Hoshiarpur for an offence punishable under section 420 of Indian Penal Code.

(2.) Learned senior counsel for the petitioners has submitted that Arpan Jain, brother of Darpan Jain is also an accused in this case and his petition for bail has been declined by this court. According to him, there is no role of Darpan Jain at all in the matter; neither in the matter of general power of attorney nor being a beneficiary of any transaction. According to him, four enquiries have been conducted in this case and in all the four enquries, petitioner Darpan Jain has been found innocent. According to him, his role is only of being a brother of Arpan Jain and nothing more than that.

(3.) Learned senior counsel has further submitted that on 9.11.2009, Bikram Singh, the complainant executed a general power of attorney in respect of 58 kanals of land in favour of Gaurav Jain, the other petitioner. According to him, simultaneously, an agreement of sale was also executed regarding which this general power of attorney was executed and got registered. According to him, the general power of attorney has been irrevocable because the sale price for the land had been received. According to him, on 25.6.2010, on the basis of the general power of attorney dated 9.11.2009, Gaurav Jain executed two sale deeds. According to him, the complainant became greedy and on account of greed cancelled the power of attorney on 15.4.2010. According to him, Gaurav Jain filed suit for specific performance, the plaint of which is Annexure P7. This was with regard to the agreement & 3 . dated 9.11.2009. According to him, money was paid by way of cheques, but subsequently, the cheques were taken back and cash was paid. In this regard, he drew attention of the court to Annexures P9 to P15 which are signed by Gaurav Jain and Bikram Singh besides Arpan Jain and others. According to him, the question as to whether the receipts bear the signatures of Bikram Singh would have to be examined by the trial court in the light of the evidence coming on the record. He has further submitted that the entire case depends on documentary evidence and all the documents are with the police. He has further submitted that in no manner, it can be said that the petitioners have committed the offence punishable under section 420 IPC.