MANISH GOYAL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition, under Section 438 Cr.P.C., has been filed by the petitioner, for the grant of anticipatory bail, in case FIR No. 339, dated 16.12.08, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, and 471 IPC, Police Station Division No. 5, Ludhiana.

(2.) I have heard the Counsel for the parties, and have gone through the record of the case, carefully.

(3.) The Counsel for the accused-petitioner has submitted that, as per the allegations, in the FIR, the power of attorney dated 11.02.05, was forged by the accused by putting up some impostor, in place of Ramnik Gupta, complainant, in connivance with his co-accused. He has further submitted that the present FIR, has been got registered, by the complainant with mala fide intention. He has further submitted that no loss, has occurred, to the complainant, nor any gain, has been caused, to the accused-petitioner. He has further submitted that the property, in dispute, alongwith other property, belonged to Smt. Rukmani Devi, who died, on 01.05.91. He has further submitted that Saroj Goyal, Neelam Gupta, Sudershan Goyal and Nirmala @ Bimla Aggarwal, sisters of Ramnik Gupta, executed two relinquishment deeds, with respect to the residential as well as commercial properties, on 23.02.98 and 06.10.98, leaving their shares, in favour of their four brothers namely Raj Kumar, Ramesh Kumar, Sunil Kumar and Ramnik Gupta. He has further submitted that, by way of memorandum of family settlement, dated 17.08.2000, all the four brothers inherited the properties, in equal shares. He has further submitted that, as per the family settlement, property mentioned, at Sr. No. 4 of the petition, came to the share of the complainant. He has further submitted that after the execution of the memorandum of family settlement, on 17.08.2000, three brothers namely Raj Kumar, Sushil Kumar, and Ramesh Kumar, jointly sold their share, by way of execution of sale deeds dated 20.03.03 and 24.08.04, in favour of Veena Rani, Janak Raj, and Kulwarit Rai respectively. He has further submitted that the dispute, is, with regard to the property, situated in Dehradun, measuring 3385 sq. feet (314.53 sq. mts) at 3-EC Road, Dehradun (Uttranchal), for which, power of attorney, was executed, by four brothers and, sisters, in favour of Manish Goyal, accused-petitioner, and which was not the subject matter of the aforesaid deeds. He has further submitted that, the accused-petitioner, did not impersonate Ramnik Gupta, complainant. He has further submitted that Ramnik Gupta, was only having share of 39 sq. mts, in the property, in dispute, the value whereof, comes to Rs. 2 lacs. He has further submitted that the instant FIR, has been got registered, with a view to force the petitioner, to persuade Ashish Aggarwal son of Ramesh Aggarwal, the complainant, in FIR No. 24 dated 25.02.05, to effect a compromise with the complainant party. He has farther submitted that the petitioner, has been wrongly involved, in the instant case. He has further submitted that the custodial interrogation of the accused-petitioner, is not at all required, as no recovery is to be effected from him. He has farther submitted that the petitioner is, thus, entitled to the grant of anticipatory bail.