IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

246 CRM-M-51409-2025 Decided on : 17.09.2025 SURINDER SINGH . . . PETITIONER VS.

STATE OF PUNJAB . . . RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT: Mr. G.S. Nahel, Advocate Mr. Aashish Sood, Advocate Mr. Harveen Gill, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Bareen Pratap Singh, AAG, Punjab.

****

SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral)

1. Petitioner (Surinder Singh), aged about 44 years, has filed the instant petition under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.) for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, during the pendency of trial, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder :-

Name of FIR No. Date Section(s) Police District petitioner(s) Station Surinder 27 03.04.2024 420, 467, NRI SAS Singh 468, 471, SAS Nagar

120-B Nagar Mohali IPC

2. FIR has been registered on the complaint of one Kishan Dev against (1) Balwinder Singh (2) Surinder Singh and (3) Khushwant Singh (petitioner herein) with the allegations that they forged the signatures of his father Jaidev Singh and uncle Joginder Singh and got transferred the land measuring 32 Kanal – 17 Marla in their favour by preparing a false affidavit dated 15.12.2010. The land was got transferred through a civil court decree and thus, with the allegation of committing fraud and causing damage to the complainant, instant FIR was got registered against accused persons.

3. The facts, as detailed in FIR, revealed out that after partition of the country in the year 1947, the Government allotted land measuring 23 Kanal – 9 Marla in the name of Joginder Singh (uncle of complainant) and land measuring 9 Kanal – 8 Marla in the name of Jaidev Singh (father of complainant), total land measuring 32 Kanal – 17 Marla. About 40-45 years ago, both of them (father and uncle of complainant) had migrated to Thailand and started residing with the complainant, thus, fraud has been committed after their death by accused persons by getting the land transferred in their names.

4. Demonstrating the facts as alleged in FIR, counsel argues that there are so many disputed facts, which would be resolved through the documentary evidence, which already has been collected by the investigating agency during the course of investigation. Moreover, the other factual aspects such as, guards and owners of allottees of the land, namely, Jaidev Singh and Joginder Singh, had ever visited India or not before their death i.e. in the year 2020 or near about, would be subject matter to be proved by the prosecution beyond doubt during the course of trial. It is also argued that FIR has been registered at a belated stage because the affidavit was purported to be executed way back on dated 15.12.2010, whereas FIR in question was lodged after more than 14 years i.e. on 03.04.2024. It is also pointed out that apart from affidavit dated 15.12.2010, which was the basic document for passing a decree on 19.09.2012, was well within the lifetime of actual owners of the land and there being no challenge ever during their lifetime period, would give chance of raising presumption in favour of accused party that infact there was no such fraud ever played and had there been any illegal act at the instance of petitioner, the same could not be kept concealed for a period of 12 years i.e. upto the time of registration of FIR, thus, lodging of FIR is just to twist the arm and to pressurize the accused party including the petitioner. Moreover, all the charges are triable by Court of Magistrate and after completion of investigation, the challan against accused persons has been presented on 04.07.2025, whereas the petitioner is suffering incarceration since 27.05.2025, thus, prayer has been made for grant of concession of regular bail to the petitioner during the pendency of trial.

5. On the other hand, learned State counsel has raised serious objection to the prayer made by the petitioner for grant of regular bail during the pendency