***

GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J. (ORAL) --

CRM-12747-2021

In view of the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed and the document annexed with the application is taken on record as Annexure P-7.

CRM-M-17072-2021 (Main Case)

1. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking grant of regular bail in respect of a case registered against him vide FIR No.148 dated 20.3.2020 at Police Station Sector 32-33, Karnal under Sections 120-B, 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 and 201 of Indian Penal Code.

2. The FIR was lodged at the instance of Sultan Singh, wherein it is alleged that in the year 2014 he wished to purchase a plot and the petitioner Ranjit Singh alias Bittu introduced the complainant to two property dealers namely Vimal and Ashok, who showed a house to the complainant. The complainant entered into an agreement dated 22.12.2014 with Dalbir Singh for purchase of the said house upon representation having been made by the aforesaid property dealers and paid the earnest amount of Rs.10 lakhs out of the agreed sale consideration of Rs.33 lakhs. It is alleged that subsequently the sale-deed was somehow not got executed and he was informed by aforesaid two property dealers that there was some dispute in respect of the title of the said property. It is further alleged in the FIR that on account of the aforesaid position, the said agreement dated 22.12.2014 was cancelled and the accused represented that another plot was available for sale and thus got another agreement to sell in respect of a plot of Joginder executed in favour of the complainant on 2.2.2015. Said Joginder was being represented by his attorney Jasso. At the time of execution of the said agreement dated 2.2.2015 the earnest amount of Rs.10 lakhs paid in the earlier agreement was adjusted and another amount of Rs.1.34 lakhs was also paid by the complainant towards the sale consideration. It is alleged that subsequently in January 2018 when the complainant went to check out the plot in question, he came to know that the plot in question belongs to somebody else and that he had been cheated.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case and that infact the falsity of the case would be evident from the fact that the complainant, when examined in the witness box, has absolutely resiled from his statement. Learned counsel, in this regard, has drawn the attention of this Court to the statement of the complainant i.e. PW-2 Sultan Singh (Annexure P-7) recorded before the Trial Court on 20.4.2021, wherein he has not supported the case of the prosecution at all.

4. Opposing the petition, the learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that the accused has apparently won over the complainant and that since specific allegations have been levelled in the FIR, no case for grant of bail is made out. Learned State counsel has, however, informed that the petitioner as on date has been behind bars since the last about 4 months and that challan already stands presented and that the petitioner is not involved in any other case.

5. I have considered rival submissions addressed before this Court.

6. Having regard to the fact that the petitioner has been behind bars since the last about 4 months and while noticing that the complainant, when examined during the proceedings of trial, has resiled from his statement, further detention of the petitioner will not serve any useful purpose. The petition, as such, is accepted and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned.

Petition allowed.

********