Dismissed

Gulzar Singh and Another v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC1 Nov 2012CRM-M/34066/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a petition for anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC. The petitioners faced allegations of forging a will and impersonating a missing individual to mutate property. The court held that due to serious allegations of forgery, extraordinary relief was not warranted.

What did the court decide?

Application for anticipatory bail dismissed as devoid of merit.

Gulzar Singh and Another Vs State of… — Succession and Inheritance | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

-1-

¶2

Crl.M.No.M-34066 of 2012(O&M)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶4

Crl.M.No.M-34066 of 2012(O&M) Date of Decision: November 1, 2012

¶5

Gulzar Singh and another

.....Petitioners

State of Punjab

.....Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA

¶11

Present: Mr.Anil Chawla, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶12

.....

¶13

RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral)

¶14

Crl.M.No.65058 of 2012

¶15

Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions.

¶16

Crl.M.No.M-34066 of 2012

¶17

The present petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in case FIR No.178, dated 12.7.2012, under Sections 419, 420, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Patti, District Tarn Taran.

¶18

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and have gone through the whole record carefully, including the impugned order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Tarn Taran, vide which application filed on behalf of the present petitioners for anticipatory bail was dismissed.

¶19

Brief allegations against petitioners-accused are that dispute is regarding property of Mohinder Singh, who is stated to be missing since the year 1985. He was having no issue. Smt. Surjit Kaur is his sister whereas father of present petitioners is his brother. There are allegations that the Will was alleged to have been executed by Mohinder Singh in favour of petitioner no.1 and his father Joginder Singh and after death of Joginder Singh on the basis of said Will, mutation No.3509 with regard to inheritance of property of Mohinder Singh, was sanctioned in the names of present

¶20

Crl.M.No.M-34066 of 2012(O&M)

¶21

-2-

¶22

petitioners and other legal heirs of Joginder Singh. Appeal was filed by Surjit Kaur against the same and, hence, the case was remanded for fresh decision to Collector, Tarn Taran. A civil suit was also filed by Surjit Kaur for seeking declaration that Mohinder Singh be presumed to be dead as he has not been heard for the last more than seven years by anybody.

¶23

However, allegations are that the said alleged Will in favour of petitioner no.1 and his father is a result of forgery and impersonation as no such Will was executed by Mohinder Singh. Matter was duly enquired into before registration of the FIR and it came during enquiry that the alleged Will of Mohinder Singh was got executed and registered by impersonation by producing some other person in place of Mohinder Singh as he was missing. The said Will was produced before Revenue Authorities for the first time for getting mutation sanctioned by the present petitioners after death of their father Joginder Singh.

¶24

It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitionersaccused that the dispute is civil in nature and that Will is a registered Will and that civil suit is also pending.

¶25

There are serious allegations against petitioners-accused. The present FIR was registered after due enquiry by higher police officials and it came during enquiry that the Will was a forged one and prepared by impersonation as Mohinder Singh was missing.

¶26

Hence, in view of these facts, it is not such a case in which extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitionersaccused.

¶27

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition filed by petitioners-Gulzar Singh and Gurmeet Kaur for grant of anticipatory bail is, hereby, dismissed being devoid of any merit.

¶28

meenu

¶29

(Ram Chand Gupta) Judge

¶30

1.11.2012

Gulzar Singh and Another v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gulzar Singh and Another v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mool Chand Vs State of Hry & Ors.

Shakuntla Khandelwal Vs Registrar,Cooperative Societies, Ut, Chd. & Anr.

Ramesh Chand & Ors. Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Paramjit Kaur Vs State of Punjab etc.

Vikash @ Vicky Vs State of Haryana

Aman Kumar and Another Vs State of Punjab etc.