(1.) Petitioner Mangal Singh, apprehending his arrest in a nonbailable offence in case FIR No. 101 dated 26.4.2006 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Mahendergarh, has filed this petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the grant of anticipatory bail.
(2.) On January 19, 2007, interim anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioner subject to his joining investigation. I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the contents of the FIR as well as the order dated 4.12.2006, passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Narnaul, whereby bail application of the petitioner has been dismissed.
(3.) Counsel for the petitioner contends that the aforesaid FIR has been got registered by complainant Sumer Singh on the allegation that the sale deed alleged to have been executed by him and his brother Rajesh Kumar and sisters Savita and Santo on 16.4.1990, is a forged document and they never executed this sale deed in favour of petitioner Mangal Singh and his brother Rama Nand. He further contends that the allegations are totally false and a valid sale deed executed in the year 1990 and after 16 years of the said sale deed, a complaint was made on the basis of which the aforesaid FIR has been registered. Counsel for the petitioner further contends that during the course of investigation, thumb impressions of complainant Sumer Singh, his brother Rakesh Kumar and sisters were compared and as per the report of the Forensic Science Laboratory, those thumb impressions tallied with the specimen thumb impressions given by them. As per the report, signatures of the complainant could not be compared. The trial court has declined anticipatory bail to the petitioner on the ground that the original sale deed is to be recovered. In this regard, counsel submits that the sale deed is a registered document and copy of the same is available in the office of Sub Registrar, from where comparison has already been made by the investigating agency.