IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

107-A Date of decision: 09.03.2026 Surjit Singh ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY *****

Present : Mr. J.S. Dadwal, Advocate for the petitioner Ms. Gagandeep Kaur, DAG Punjab Mr. Ashdeep Singh and Mr. Mikhail Kad, Advocates for the complainant *****

AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL)

1. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 BNSS for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.0189 dated 26.08.2025, registered under Sections 420, 120-B IPC, at Police Station Maqboolpura, Amritsar.

2. On 04.11.2025, this Court had passed the following order:-

“This petition for grant of anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS, has been filed by petitioner, an accused in case bearing FIR No.189 dated 26.08.2025 registered against him at Police Station Maqboolpura, District Amritsar, for the commission of offences punishable u/s 420, 120-B of IPC.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that falsity of the case set up by the complainant party is apparent from the fact that there has been an unexplained delay of almost 09 years in getting the FIR registered. In any case, the entire case is based on documentary evidence, for which presence of the petitioner is not needed. Nonetheless, petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer.

Notice of motion.

On advance notice, Mr. Kamalpreet Bawa, DAG, Punjab, appears on behalf of respondent-State and has opposed the request for grant of pre-arrest bail on the ground that petitioner is the beneficiary of the entire forged transaction. It is the submission of learned State counsel that the father of the petitioner, namely, Hazara Singh had been given a General Power of Attorney way back in the year 1987 by the original owner of the property. Despite the fact that one of the owner’s died in 1990, late Sh. Hazara Singh on the strength of the said GPA, transferred the land in favour of his sons including present petitioner by way of registered sale deed. It is only when the mutation of the sale transaction was effected after 06 years that the complainant came to know of the fraud committed upon him and the other legal heirs of original owners. Thus, there has been no unexplained delay in lodging the FIR. Further, as per learned State counsel, when appreciated in the factual matrix of the case, sale transfer in favour of the petitioner is void ab initio, having been executed on the strength of the GPA, which was no longer valid. Learned State counsel does not dispute the fact that the present case is totally based on documentary evidence and as of now, it is not clear as to whether any civil suit has been filed by the complainant party.

Learned State counsel requests for time to file status report in the matter.

Heard.

Adjourned to 28.11.2025.

In the meanwhile, the petitioner is hereby directed to join investigation within seven days from today and co- operate in the same. In the event of the arrest of the petitioner, he shall be released on interim bail on his furnishing personal/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer. He shall also abide by conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) BNSS.

Be tagged with CRM-M-58885-2025.”

3. Learned counsel submits that in pursuance of the afore-mentioned order, the petitioner has not only joined investigation but also fully cooperated with the investigating agency. He further submits that in case the investigating agency requires the petitioner to appear, he shall make himself available without demur.

4. Learned State counsel on instructions affirms the factum of joining the investigation by the petitioner and cooperating with the investigating agency. He also submits that at this stage, the petitioner is not required for further custodial interrogation.

5. In view of the above and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, anticipatory bail p