RANJEET KAUR Vs. STATE OF DELHI
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
RANJEET KAUR,RANI KHORANA
STATE OF DELHI
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) THESE two applications under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been made for anticipatory bail by the accused, who are involved in case under Section 420/468/500/506/511 IPC. The applicants/accused persons and complainant are related to each other. The applicants/accused persons forged a mortgage deed of the property of the complainant showing that complainant had received a sum of Rs.32 lac in lieu of mortgaging of his property. The mortgage was shown to be executed at Mumbai on 4th October, 2000 whereas the complainant on that day was not even in Mumbai and he was admitted in Sir Ganga Ram Hospital on that day as he was suffering from certain ailment. The age of the complainant is shown in the mortgage deed as 55 years whereas he was more than 60 years of age at that time. This mortgage deed was first forged and forged mortgage deed was used by the applicants as their defence in different Courts to the claim of the complainant in different Courts. The mortgage deed was also used in Allahabad High Court for obtaining an order of no arrest. The preliminary investigation done by the investigating agency shows that on the date when alleged mortgage deed was executed complainant was not even in Mumbai he was admitted in Sir Ganga Ram Hospital. Looking into the fact that a forged mortgage deed for Rs.32 lac was created and was blatantly used by the applicants in different Courts, I consider that it is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. Both the applications are hereby dismissed.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.