Shyam Sunder Sanganeria and Others vs State of Haryana

Inderjit Singh, J.—Petitioners Shyam Sunder Sanganeria, Vijay Kumar Sanganeria, Sushil Kumar Sanganeria, Rajinder Kumar Sanganeria and Hari Ram Sanganeria have filed this petition u/s 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 460 dated 6.8.2012 registered at Police Station, City Hansi, District Hisar, for the offences under Sections 420, 406 and 120-B IPC. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that four out of five petitioners have already joined the investigation in view of the interim order dated 7.6.2013 passed by this Court. The dispute between the parties is on the basis of agreement executed between them. It is admitted fact that so many sale deeds have been executed on the basis of agreement Annexure. P.1 whereas the petitioners allege that another agreement was executed and on the basis of that agreement even the sale deeds etc. have been executed, but the learned counsel for the respondent-State contends that this agreement is the forged document and there are no such signatures of the complainant-respondent on the said agreement.

From a perusal of the record, it looks that the dispute is of civil nature. Twenty three sale deeds have been executed on the basis of power of attorney of the petitioners'' party and eleven sale deeds have been executed in favour of the complainant directly by the owners. The respondent also admits the payment of Rs. 27 Lacs by the complainant to the petitioners but they stated that they have not paid this amount in view of the second agreement. So from the record, it looks that the case between the parties is based on the documentary evidence and there is dispute of civil nature regarding the implementation of the agreement.

The petitioners are not required for custodial interrogation. Nothing is to be recovered from them. No useful purpose will be served by sending them to custody. Therefore, without discussing the facts in detail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of this case at this stage and in the facts and circumstances, I find merit in the petition and the same is accepted. The interim order passed by this Court on 7.6.2013 is made absolute. However, the petitioners shall join the investigation as and when called upon to do so and shall abide by the conditions as laid down in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.