Back
GURVINDER SINGH GILL
Jaljeet @ Sudhir – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. allegations of fraud and forgery in property sale (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments regarding evidence and involvement (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. court's consideration of trial and bail conditions (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. procedural order concerning original documents (Para 9 , 10) |
JUDGMENT
Mr. Gurvinder Singh Gill, J. (Oral)
The petitioner seeks grant of regular bail in respect of aforementioned FIR.
2. The allegations, in nutshell, are that on 01.09.2022, Shri Sumit Nath Attorney/Legal Representative of Baptist Missionary Society Corporation, India (in short hereinafter referred to as 'the BMSC') made a complaint to the Superintendent of Police, Bhiwani alleging therein that one Satish George and his accomplices in connivance with government officials had hatched a criminal conspiracy to dispose of properties owned by the BMSC including a plot measuring 20 kanals 11 marlas situated at Hansi Gate, Bhiwani on the basis of forged and fabricated documents, in favour of Jaljeet Malik (petitioner) and Rajesh Kumar.
3. Pursuant to receipt of the aforesaid complaint, the matter was inquired into by the Additional Superintendent of Police, Bhiwani and the allegations, as levelled by the complainant
The court granted bail considering the lengthy custody of the petitioner and the potential delays in trial, emphasizing that continued detention would not serve a useful purpose.
The gravity of the offense and the petitioner's involvement in similar other FIRs influenced the court's decision in dismissing the bail application.
The court affirmed the serious nature of fraud and forgery allegations as grounds for denying bail, emphasizing the petitioner's significant role in a criminal conspiracy.
Impersonation in obtaining land deeds constitutes forgery under relevant statutes.
Point of Law : Cases of similar in nature were pending - Bail granted - Pendency of other cases of similar nature by itself is no ground to refuse the bail to the accused.
The change in circumstances, completion of investigation, and commencement of trial can be sufficient mitigating circumstances to grant bail, without commenting on the merits of the case.
The court may grant bail if continued custody does not serve justice, especially in cases where evidence is predominantly documentary and recovery of items is not imminent.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
