Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Abhilasha Jasra v. State of Punjab - CRM-43417-M-2006 [2006] RD-P&H 4394 (19 July 2006)

Crl.M.No. 43417 M OF 2006.


Abhilasha Jasra vs State of Punjab

Present : Mr.Gurcharan Dass, Advocate,

for the petitioner.


Counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner's husband purchased plot No.36, measuring 200 sq. yards, by registered sale deed, dated 29.6.2004, in her name. Her co-accused, Neeraj Sood purchased plot No. 35, measuring 200 sq. yards, vide a separate registered sale deed, on the same day. The petitioner thereafter, without executing any document, sold her plot to Neeraj Sood and received consideration amount in respect thereof. Thereafter, Neeraj Sood sold the said plot to one Ashok Kumar, vide registered sale deed, dated 17.1.2005. The petitioner merely affixed her signatures, as she was reflected as an owner of the plot, in the revenue record. Neeraj Sood received the consideration amount, by way of cheques, and handed over the same to the petitioner. It is further contended that the cheques were got encashed by the petitioner from her bank and money was handed over to Neeraj Sood. This fact can be verified from the petitioner's bank account. It is contended that the only dispute is as to the misdescription of the property.

Notice of motion to A.G.Punjab for 18.9.2006.

Meanwhile, in the event of her arrest, the petitioner shall be released on interim anticipatory bail by the Arresting Officer to his satisfaction, subject to the following conditions :-

i) that she shall make herself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

ii) that she shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, Crl.Misc.No.43417.M of 2006 : 2 :

threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

iii)that she shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.


July 27, 2006. JUDGE



Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.