PRATIBHA MANCHANDA & ANR versus STATE OF HARYANA & ANR

Citation: [2023] 10 S.C.R. 411 · Decided: 07-07-2023 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: SURYA KANT · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

cites 3 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
411
411
PRATIBHA MANCHANDA & ANR.
v.
STATE OF HARYANA & ANR.
(Criminal Appeal No 1793 of 2023)
JULY 07, 2023
[SURYA KANT AND C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ.]
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s. 438 – Anticipatory
bail – Rejection of – Appellants’ case that they had possession over
the subject land and they never sold the subject land to anyone nor
have they ever executed any power of attorney (GPA) in favor of
any third party – However, appellants learnt that the accused persons
had approached the halqa patwari to sanction mutation of the
aforesaid land – It was alleged that the application for mutation
was based on a forged and fabricated sale deed dated 24.02.2022
– Appellant also learnt that the said sale deed was based on yet
another, purportedly, forged and fabricated GPA dated 18.09.1996
– FIR registered against respondent no.2 and other accused persons
u/ss.406, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC – Respondent no.2
fearing arrest filed an application for anticipatory bail before the
Sessions Judge but the same was dismissed – However, the High
Court granted anticipatory bail to the accused – On appeal, held:
According to respondent no.2, what transpired in 1996 was sale of
the subject land through GPA – However, regardless of obtaining
all the rights over the subject land, respondent no.2 never informed
the Revenue/local authorities that he had purportedly ‘purchased’
the subject land through a GPA – The ownership of the land always
remained in the name of the appellants in the revenue record – A
portion of subject land was acquired by the government after
execution of the 1996 GPA and compensation was paid to the
appellants – Respondent no.2 neither objected to the payment of
such compensation nor asserted his title over the land, which he
normally would have done had he possessed any rights over it –
Respondent no.2 failed to show payment of consideration to the
appellants – Sale deed was executed without mentioning PAN number
or deducting TDS – It is also unclear that when subject land was
situated in Gurugram district, why the GPA was registered in Kalkaji
[2023] 10 S.C.R. 411 : 2023 INSC 612
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
412
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2023] 10 S.C.R.
– There are overwhelming prima facie evidences to indicate that the
version of events provided by respondent no.2 , the buyers of
property and Sub-registrar should be viewed with scepticism – A
thorough investigation is required by the investigating authorities –
Therefore, custodial interrogation of respondent no.2 and other
accused required – Order of the High Court granting bail set aside.
Bail – Anticipatory Bail – Purpose – The relief of Anticipatory
Bail is aimed at safeguarding individual rights – While it serves as
a crucial tool to prevent the misuse of the power of arrest and protects
innocent individuals from harassment, it also presents challenges
in maintaining a delicate balance between individual rights and
the interests of justice and striking a balance between safeguarding
individual rights and protecting public interest – While the right to
liberty and presumption of innocence are vital, the court must also
consider the gravity of the offence, the impact on society, and the
need for a fair and free investigation.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1. The relief of Anticipatory Bail is aimed at
safeguarding individual rights. While it serves as a crucial tool to
prevent the misuse of the power of arrest and protects innocent
individuals from harassment, it also presents challenges in
maintaining a delicate balance between individual rights and the
interests of justice. The tight rope lies in striking a balance
between safeguarding individual rights and protecting public
interest. While the right to liberty and presumption of innocence
are vital, the court must also consider the gravity of the offence,
the impact on society, and the need for a fair and free investigation.
The court’s discretion in weighing these interests in the facts
and circumstances of each individual case becomes crucial to
ensure a just outcome. [Para 19][421-E-G]
2. In light of Respondent No. 2’s own contention, what
transpired in 1996 was the sale of the Subject Land through the
GPA. Upon reviewing a copy of the alleged 1996 GPA presented
to the court, the Appellants relinquished all crucial rights
pertaining to the Subject Land. These rights include possession
of the land, handling water, sewer, electricity, power connections,
and other services related to the p

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.