The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for providing evidence of transactions and the seriousness of allegations in property ownership disputes and forgery cases.

JUDGMENT

Rajnish Bhatnagar, J.

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 283/2023 under Sections 420/467/468/471/447/448/120B/34 IPC registered at Police Station Jyoti Nagar.

2. In brief the facts of the case, as asserted by the prosecution, are that complainants are the true and legal owners of the property in question i.e. C-132 (Old Number. C-143) Plot No. 1-2, Amar Colony, Block C, East Gokul Pur, Delhi total land measuring 345 sq yards. It is alleged that complainant, namely, Jiten Mahajan became the owner of the said property vide GPA executed in his favor by his father, namely, Sukhdev Raj Mahajan, for property bearing no. C-132 admeasuring 240 sq yards, Plot No. 1-2, Khasra No. 796/705/2, Block C, Amar Colony, East Gokul Pur. It is further alleged that a gift deed and also a possession letter/Will in respect of said property had been executed in favor of the complainant by his father. The said GPA dated 18.09.2019 had been registered at office of Sub Registrar Vivek Vihar, New Delhi vide Register no. 1774, Book No. 4, Volume No. 266. It is further alleged that complainant, namely, Jai Prakash Pal is claiming ownership of another 105 sq yards of the said property bearing no. C-132, through his daughter Sarita, who purchased the same vide GPA and agreement to sell dated 12.09.2001. The GPA in favour of Jai Prakash Pal from his daughter Sarita is also stated to be registered at the office of Sub Registrar, Vivek Vihar, New Delhi vide Register No. 1775, Book No. 4, Volume No. 266

3. It is alleged by the complainants that the complainants came to know that the accused, along with his associates, were trying to disturb the possession of complainants and had occupied the property in question. The matter was reported and consequently present case FIR No. 283/2023 was registered.

4. It is submitted by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted by him that the petitioner was the true and lawful owner of the property in question total admeasuring 345 sq yards till 29.12.2022 when he sold the said property to persons namely Sudheer Kumar, Saurabh Kumar, Rajesh Kumar and Mahinder Pal Singh vide Sale Deed dated 29.12.2022. It is further submitted that the petitioner had purchased the said property in question from one Rewati Dass and Prem Raj vide Agreement to Sell dated 30.05.1989 and one possession letter of the same date. It is further submitted by him that on 20.11.2022, while petitioner was getting construction work done on the property in question, complainant, namely, Jiten Mahajan along with his associates came to the property and started assaulting the petitioner and tried to take possession of the said property. It is further submitted that the said complainant and his associates have also prepared forged documents for claiming ownership of the property in question and has filed the present FIR by concealing the material facts and documents from the investigating agency. It is further submitted that complainant filed a false and frivolous civil suit before this Hon'ble Court by concealing material facts, in particular the fact that the property already stood sold to the third party vide registered Sale Deed dated 29.12.2022. It is further submitted by him that since no case as alleged is made out against the petitioner and that the allegations being based on documentary evidence, no custodial interrogation of petitioner is necessary. It is further submitted that the petitioner is ready to join the investigation and will appear before the IO as and when required. It is further submitted that investigating agency, in connivance with complainants, has added Section 467 IPC to the present FIR merely to make the allegations graver in nature. It is further submitted that the other alleged offences, apart from Section 467 IPC, being punishable