IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 10.09.2025 Sunil Kumar ....Petitioner V/s State of Haryana ....Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. S.K. Garg Narwana, Senior Advocate with Mr. Vishal Garg Narwana, Advocate and Mr. RPS Jammu, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Tarun Aggarwal, Additional Advocate General Haryana.

Mr. Sandeep Vermani, Advocate for the complainant.

*****

SUMEET GOEL, J.

1. Present petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking grant of anticipatory/pre-arrest bail under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 in FIR No.340 dated 07.08.2024 registered for offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of the IPC at Police Station Palam Vihar, District Gurugram.

2. The gravamen of the FIR pertains to defrauding a person namely Mrs. Indira Khanna aged 74 years, registered owner of Plot No.3707P, Sector 23-23-A, Gurugram through sale-deed No.10641 dated 16.08.2004. She alleged that she came to know from reliable sources that accused namely Mr. Sunil Kumar (petitioner herein) had illegally and fraudulently executed a sale-deed No.1693 dated 14.05.2024 in his favour using forged Aadhaar, PAN, photograph and false signatures without her consent or appearance before the Tehsildar in respect of the aforesaid plot. She alleged that she had never sold, transferred or authorized anybody for sale of the plot in question. Furthermore, the complainant alleged that she had neither applied for transfer of the plot in question in HUDA nor appeared before any authority in this regard. The Aadhaar Card, PAN, photograph and signatures used in the forged sale-deed are false and not of the complainant. The complainant further alleged that the cheque number mentioned in the fraudulent sale-deed was never credited to her account. The complainant has further alleged that she had never appeared before the Tehsildar or signed any documents relating to the plot in question. She alleged that the aforesaid fraudulent act amounts to criminal impersonation, cheating, forgery and fraud under the IPC. According to the complainant, all the original documents of the plot in question were still lying with her which can be verified. On the basis of the aforesaid complaint, instant FIR has been registered against the petitioner and investigation ensued.

3. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned senior counsel has further iterated that the petitioner has purchased the plot in question, after paying a substantial amount to the persons impersonating as the lawful owner namely Indira, Mukesh Kumar Meena, Dropadi Meena and Nishant Dalal. According to learned Senior counsel, the petitioner acted in good faith as a bona fide purchaser, relying upon the documents i.e. Aadhaar card, PAN etc. and even bore expenses towards the stamp duty. However, later on, it was revealed that the so-called seller(s) was an imposter and the property in question actually belongs to the complainant. Thus, the petitioner himself is a real victim, having been cheated of his hard earned money by a criminal gang operating in collusion with certain HUDA and revenue officials who facilitated the fraudulent registration. Furthermore, there is delay of nearly 04 months in lodging the FIR which casts serious doubt on the narrative of the prosecution. It has been further submitted that the ingredients of Sections 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC are not attracted against the petitioner as he has not cheated or impersonated anyone rather he has been cheated through impersonation and forgery. It has been further iterated that the petitioner has already lodged a complaint with the Police against the actual culprits prior to registration of the FIR but no action was taken due to their influence. It has been further submitted that the investigation conducted so far is neither fair nor impartial, having shield