Dismissed

Jagroop Singh v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC12 Apr 2016CRM-M/11568/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this anticipatory bail application, the petitioner contested allegations of receiving money through an allegedly fake GPA. The Court found that custodial interrogation was essential for fair investigation given the allegations of forgery and cheating. Consequently, the prayer for bail was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Application for anticipatory bail dismissed; custodial interrogation directed.

Jagroop Singh Vs State of Punjab — Cheating and Forgery | Punjab & Haryana HC (2016)

¶1

CRM-M 11568/2016

¶2

120

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Date of decision:12.04.2016

¶5

Jagroop Singh

¶6

.............Petitioner

¶7

¶8

State of Punjab

¶9

.............Respondent

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH

¶11

Present:Mr.AS Kalra,Advocate for the petitioner

¶12

Mr.Kirat Singh Sidhu,DAG Punjab with HC Varinder Singh

¶13

Jaswant Singh,J.(Oral)

¶14

Prayer is for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.43 dated 26.2.2016 under Sections 420,465, 468,471,120-B IPC,PS Dakha,Distt.Ludhiana Rural.

¶15

The allegations by complainant/NRI-Avtar Singh Cheema is that the petitioner has used a forged GPA dated 28.8.2014 allegedly executed in favour of the petitioner and thereby received around Rs.11 lacs from different persons by executing agreement to sell of the land belonging to the complainant.

¶16

It is contended that upto date neither any proposed vendee has come forward to make a complaint nor any agreement to sell has been brought on record nor the alleged forged GPA has seen the light of

¶17

RAJINDER PRASHAD JOSHI 2016.04.13 11:47 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh.

CRM-M 11568/2016

120

the day.

Upon notice, learned State counsel on instructions submits that statements of the persons in whose favour the agreements to sell based on the GPA dated 28.8.2014 have been executed, have since been recorded. During investigation it has been verified that there is a GPA dated 28.8.2014 in favour of Jagroop Singh by the owner Avtar Singh Cheema which is alleged to be forged by the complainant. Therefore,he submits that custodial interrogation is required for fair and proper investigation.

¶22

Keeping in view the nature and gravity of allegations, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required for fair and proper investigation and no case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out.

¶23

Dismissed.

¶24

12.04.2016 (Jaswant Singh) joshi Judge

¶25

RAJINDER PRASHAD JOSHI 2016.04.13 11:47 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh.

Jagroop Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jagroop Singh 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Malkiat Singh Vs State of Punjab

Kaur Singh Vs State of Punjab

Sandeep Sharma @ Kaka Vs State of Punjab

Sandeep Vs State of Haryana

Sarwan Singh Vs State of Punjab & Anr.

Salwinder Pal @ Surinder Pal and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.