Anticipatory bail is an extraordinary remedy and should be granted sparingly, especially where serious allegations warrant custodial interrogation for proper investigation.

JUDGMENT :

SURYA PARTAP SINGH, J.

1. This is first petition under Section 482 of BNSS for grant of anticipatory bail filed by the petitioner. The petitioner is seeking anticipatory bail in a case pertaining to an offence punishable under Section 419 , 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC , arising out of FIR No. 139 dated 11.306.2025, Police Station Mandi Gobindgarh, District Fatehgarh Sahib. For investigation of above mentioned case, the police is tracing the petitioner. Apprehending his arrest by the police, the petitioner has resorted to present petition for anticipatory bail.

2. Briefly stating the facts emerging from the record are that the above mentioned FIR came into being in the backdrop of the fact that Kashmir Giri alias Kashmir Gir, hereinafter referred to as “the complainant” had submitted a complaint with regard to formation of fake firms in the name of his two sons, by Mitul Gupta, Harsh Guptam, Ravinder Sharma and others. As per complainant, the fake firms were created to draw undue benefits by defrauding innocent persons viz-a-viz GST Authorities. According to prosecution, on the above mentioned complaint, a Special Investigating Team, hereinafter referred to as “SIT” was constituted and the above mentioned SIT conducted preliminary inquiry wherein it was revealed that the petitioner was proprietor of M/s Neelkanth Enterprises, a firm duly registered with GST Authorities, and that on 02.09.2023, the above mentioned firm was converted from proprietorship firm to partnership firm. It was also revealed during the course of investigation that on 11.08.2022, another firm, namely M/s Shivam Ispat Bhandar had purportedly sold a plot measuring 3 bighas 19 biswas, situated within the revenue estate of village Kumb, Mandi Gobindgarh, in favour of M/s Neelkanth Enterprises, through its proprietor Soni Rishi. As per prosecution, during the course of investigation, it came on surface that on 11.08.2022, when the sale deed was executed, the petitioner was lodged in jail and that to facilitate the above mentioned sale deed, one person, namely Ravinder Sharma had impersonated, before the Registration Authority, as Soni Rishi, i.e. the petitioner. According to prosecution, Ravinder Sharma had committed forgery by replacing the photograph of petitioner with his own photograph, on the Aadhar Card of petitioner.

3. It has been alleged by the prosecution that the petitioner as well as his co-accused, namely Ravinder Sharma are still at large.

4. Heard.

5. It has been argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent having no nexus, whatsoever, with the commission of offence and that a very strong plea of alebi is available with the petitioner, as at the time of execution of sale deed dated 11.08.2022, he was in custody. As per learned counsel for the petitioner, once the petitioner was not present at the time of commission of forgery, no criminal liability can be fastened upon him, with regard to forged sale deed, and that in fact, the petitioner himself is a victim of fraud allegedly played by somebody, who appeared before the Registration Authority in the name of petitioner.

6. In addition to above, learned counsel for the petitioner has also argued that the offence is, otherwise, triable by the Court of Judicial Magistrate and nothing is left to be recovered from the possession of the petitioner and therefore, his custodial interrogation is not at all required. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, in the given facts situation, the petitioner is entitled for the benefit of anticipatory bail.

7. Per contra, the learned State counsel has argued that in fact, whatever the forgery has been committed in the present case, it has been committed on account of active connivance of the petitioner with his co- accused, namely Ravinder Sharma. As per learned State counsel, in order to fix the role of petitioner, in the commission of crime, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is of utmost importance in the