JUDGMENT

Anoop Chitkara, J.

1. The petitioners apprehending arrest in the FIR captioned above have come up before this Court under Section 438 CrPC seeking anticipatory bail.

2. In paragraph 13 of the bail petition, the accused declares that they have no criminal antecedents.

3. The petitioners allegedly entered into an agreement to sell that share in the land which they did not own was agreed to be sold and advance was taken on various occasions totaling Rs. 5 Lacs.

4. Ld. Counsel for the petitioners contends that the custodial investigation would serve no purpose whatsoever, and the pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioners and their family.

5. Ld. counsel representing the State opposes bail.

REASONING:

6. The complainant has civil remedies also to recover the money or seek specific performance of the portion of the land, that they owned. Given the nature of dispute, there would be no justification to deny bail at this stage. Furthermore, the petitioners are first offender, and one of the relevant factors would be to provide an opportunity to course-c