JUDGMENT Mr. Mehinder Singh Sullar, J. (Oral) - Petitioner Jeet Ram son of Bhangi Ram, has directed the instant petition for the grant of concession of pre-arrest bail, in a case registered against him along with his other co-accused, vide FIR No.249 dated 25.11.2013 (Annexure P1), on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under sections 406, 420 and 120-B IPC by the police of Police Station Pinjore, District Panchkula. 2. Notice of the petition was issued to the respondent. 3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, going through the record with their valuable assistance and after deep consideration over the entire matter, to my mind, the present petition for anticipatory bail deserves to be accepted in this context. 4. Concisely, the prosecution, inter-alia, claimed that Jatinder Kumar s/o Rajinder Kumar was the owner of the property in dispute. Initially, he executed the agreement to sell dated 14.9.2012 (Annexure P2) with co-accused Ran Singh (non-petitioner), for a total consideration of Rs.66,50,000/-. He, instead of getting the sale deed executed or registered from his vendor, straightway agreed to sell the same land in favour of complainant Manjeet Singh s/o Kartar Singh (respondent No.2) (for brevity “the complainant”) and his wife Charanjit Kaur, for a total consideration of Rs.71,75,000/- and received an amount of Rs.36 lacs as earnest money from them. According to the prosecution that subsequently, Jeet Ram (petitioner) has purchased the land in dispute, vide sale deed dated 21.1.2013 (Annexure P3). Meaning thereby, he is a bonafide purchaser for valuable consideration. No specific role or particular part is attributed to him in the FIR. Therefore, he cannot possibly be connected with the cheating and misappropriation of the amount of Rs.36 lacs as earnest money received by co-accused Ran Singh (non-petitioner) from the complainant and his wife Charanjit Kaur. Moreover, the interim bail was granted to enable the petitioner to join the investigation, by means of order dated 31.1.2014, by a Coordinate Bench of this Court (R.P.Nagrath, J.). 5. At this stage, the learned State counsel, on instructions from SI Karam Chand, has acknowledged the relevant factual matrix and stated that the petitioner has already joined the investigation. He is no longer required for further interrogation. There is no history of his previous involvement in any other criminal case. The final conclusion of trial will naturally take a long time. 6. He is no longer required for further interrogation. There is no history of his previous involvement in any other criminal case. The final conclusion of trial will naturally take a long time. 6. In the light of aforesaid reasons, taking into consideration the totality of the facts & circumstances, emanating from the record, as depicted here-in-before and without commenting further anything on merits, lest it may prejudice the case of either side during the course of trial of main case, the instant petition is hereby accepted and the interim bail already granted to the petitioner, by means of indicated order by this court is hereby made absolute, subject to compliance of conditions as envisaged under section 438(2) Cr.PC. 7. Needless to mention that nothing observed, here-in-above, would reflect on the merits of the main case, in any manner, as the same has been so recorded for the limited purpose of deciding the present petition for anticipatory bail only. At the same time, in case, the petitioner does not cooperate or join the investigation, the prosecution would be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of his bail, in this relevant context in this Court. ---------0.B.S.0------------ —————————