INDERJIT SINGH, J. - (1.) THE petitioners have filed this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.200 dated 14.11.2013 registered at Police Station City Gurdaspur, District Gurdaspur for the offences under Sections 420 and 120 -B IPC.
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners have already joined the investigation and no more required for custodial interrogation and prayed for grant of bail. On the other hand, learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab and learned counsel for the complainant opposed the bail petition and stated that keeping in view the serious allegations against the petitioners, they are not entitled to the benefit of anticipatory bail. I have gone through the record and have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab appearing for the respondent -State as well as learned counsel for the complainant.
(3.) A perusal of the allegations made in the FIR shows that the dispute looks like a civil nature between the parties based on agreement to sell. Even one sale deed has been got executed qua one Kanal area out of the land mentioned in the agreement as per the instructions of the complainant. Civil suit regarding the same agreement had already been decided in which the present petitioners have stated that they are ready to execute the sale deed. The allegation against the present petitioners is that they have sold the property to other persons. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners were ready to execute the sale deed but the complainant had refused to get executed the sale deed. The present case is based on documentary evidence. Nothing is to be recovered from the petitioners. They are not required for custodial interrogation. No useful purpose will be served by sending the petitioners to custody.;