JUDGMENT Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral).:-By this common order, Criminal Misc. No.M-12253 of 2009 filed by Charanjit Singh, Amrik Singh and Varjinder Pal Singh and Criminal Misc.No.11845 of 2009 preferred by Dharampal will be decided together. 2. Charanjit Singh and others have filed a petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.233 dated 25.8.2008 registered at Police Station Ambala City under Sections 419, 420 and 205 IPC, whereas Dharampal petitioner has preferred a petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail. 3. One Hakam Singh was owner of 61 Kanals 4 Marlas of land in Village Amipur, Tehsil and District Ambala. Hakam Singh expired on 22.2.2005. Maya Devi was held to be Hakam Singh’s successor and mutation was sanctioned in her name. 4. Petitioners Charanjit Singh, Amrik Singh and Varjinder Pal Singh in Criminal Misc.No.M-12253 of 2009 vide sale deed dated 22.7.2008 purchased the land for a sale consideration of Rs.61,20,000/-. It later surfaced that Maya Devi was impersonated and sale deed executed in favour of the petitioners was a fraudulent document. Dharampal, petitioner in Criminal Misc.No.M-11845 of 2009 is one of the attesting witness to the sale deed. Earlier a lady who had impersonated herself, as Maya Devi had approached this Court and her pre-arrest bail application bearing Criminal Misc.No.M-1640 of 2009 was declined on 6.3.2009. 5. Mrs.Kiran Bala Jain appearing for petitioners Charanjit Singh, Amrik Singh and Varjinder Pal Singh has stated that they were bona fide purchasers. They had verified from revenue record where Maya Devi was recorded as legal heir of Hakam Singh. It is further stated that once Maya Devi was identified by a Numberdar and two advocates, it can be safely inferred that petitioners were bona fide purchasers. She has further relied upon enquiry report Annexure P2 to say that Deputy Superintendent of Police, Ambala has held that a fraud has been played with the petitioners. This Court cannot lose sight of the fact that the entire sale consideration of Rs.61,20,000/- was paid in cash. No cheque or draft was issued. There is sufficient evidence with the prosecuting agency to infer that petitioners taking into consideration that land is lying vacant, had committed fraud by bringing a lady and projecting her as Maya Devi. For advancement of investigation, custodial interrogation of the petitioners is required. Hence, prayer for pre-arrest bail is declined. 6. No cheque or draft was issued. There is sufficient evidence with the prosecuting agency to infer that petitioners taking into consideration that land is lying vacant, had committed fraud by bringing a lady and projecting her as Maya Devi. For advancement of investigation, custodial interrogation of the petitioners is required. Hence, prayer for pre-arrest bail is declined. 6. Dharampal who had identified the lady who had impersonated as Maya Devi is in custody since 15.1.2009. It is a case of magisterial trial. Report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. has been submitted. 18 witnesses have been cited by the prosecution. Trial will take long time to conclude. Further detention of the petitioner is not warranted, especially when challan has been filed against petitioner Dharampal only. Other co-accused are to be arrested and supplementary challan is to be filed against them. Therefore, petition of Dharampal is accepted. He is ordered to be released on bail to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambala. Petitions stand disposed off. ------------------