PAWAN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been directed by Pawan Kumar under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking pre-arrest bail in case FIR No. 55, dated 22.04.2015, under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Civil Line, Bathinda, District Bathinda.

(2.) Instant case was registered on the basis of complaint registered by Pawan Kumar-petitioner for taking necessary action against Humesh Kumar Chawla, Amarjit Singh @ Parshotam Lal and Tek Singh Khalsa MC, Bathinda alleging that he purchased a plot measuring 2 kanals 2 marlas on February 13, 2014 from Parshotam Lal and Dinesh Chand through Humesh Kumar and Visakha Singh, property dealer. Humesh Kumar assured him that plot is free from all types of encumbrances and litigations, which is owned by Parshotam Lal and Dinesh Chand. It has further been alleged that he was induced to enter into agreement of sell with dishonest intention by them. Subsequent thereto, Parshotam Lal, Dinesh Chand, Visakha Singh and Humesh Kumar also succeeded in obtaining a sum of Rs. 23 lacs from him. Agreement of sale was witnessed by MC Tek Singh Khalsa and Humesh Kumar Chawla. Subsequent thereto, he came to know that Amarjit Singh impersonated himself as Parshotam Lal whereas some unknown person impersonated as Dinesh Chand in connivance with Humesh Kumar, who has established the identity of Amarjit Singh as Parshotam Lal and unknown person as Dinesh Chand by producing their ration cards. Later on, he came to know that all the persons cheated him for a sum of Rs. 23 lacs with dishonest intention and also taken his signature on blank stamp paper. Inquiry was conducted by Economic Offences, Wing, Superintendent of Police, Bathinda, during which it was found that Amarjit Singh projected as Parshotam Lal whereas Jagdev Singh was projected as Dinesh Chand and they were wrongly identified by petitioner-Pawan Kumar, who got prepared forged ration card. It was further mentioned in the inquiry that Humesh Kumar, Pawan Kumar along with Vaisakha Singh knowingly hatched a conspiracy with the above said person and entered into an agreement of sale, which is otherwise a sham transaction based on fraud, in order to cause wrongful loss to the original owner and for their wrongful gain. Complainant-Pawan Kumar was nominated as an accused during inquiry, who was working as a driver of Humesh Kumar and was well aware about the entire incident. Accordingly, case under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120 IPC was registered.

(3.) The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that he has been falsely implicated in the instant case. In fact, he is sufferer, who has been duped by Humesh Kumar Chawla as well as Amarjit Singh, who impersonated himself as Parshotam Lal. Similarly, an unknown person was presented as Dinesh Chand, at the time of agreement of sale. He was induced to deliver a sum of Rs. 23 lacs. Inquiry officer has also sided with Amarjit Singh and others, real culprits, just to save their skin and for some financial gain. Petitioner is ready to join the investigation as and when required by the police and also undertakes to abide by all the terms and conditions imposed upon him by this Court, in case, he is granted the concession of pre-arrest bail.