LAWS(P&H)-1997-9-45

SRI KISHAN Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

Decided On September 23, 1997
SRI KISHAN Appellant
V/S
STATE OF HARYANA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Admittedly, the petitioner has joined the investigation. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that a civil suit has been filed by the complainant for challenging the sale- deed. This fact is not in dispute as it is admitted by learned counsel for the complainant that civil suit is so filed.

(2.) The civil suit was filed on 24.4.1997 and the F.I.R of this case was registered on 16.7.1997. The question whether the sale deed was forged of not will have to be decided in the civil suit and at present, it will not be possible for me to come to any conclusion whether any forgery was committed or not. However, if any forgery is committed, the investigation shall continue as the order of this Court will not hamper the investigation in any way. The learned counsel for the complainant has also contended that the petitioner sold his part of the land at a very high price than the other part which was sold by the alleged sale-deed. However, these are the questions which will have to be considered at the trial and I do not express any opinion on this point. However, the conditions imposed in anticipatory bail order will take care of the interest of the prosecution and if any further investigation is to be made, as stated above, this order will not come in its way.

(3.) As a result, I do not find any reason for rejecting the anticipatory bail application. This petition is, therefore, allowed. The order of interim anticipatory bail dated 26.8.1997 is made absolute for a period of 90 days from today along with the same terms and conditions. Application allowed.