IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 03.11.2025 Mahender Singh ....Petitioner V/s State of Haryana and others ....Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. Jitender Dhanda, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Gurmeet Singh, AAG Haryana.

Ms. Dheerja, Advocate as Legal Aid Counsel for the respondent Nos.2 to 5.

*****

SUMEET GOEL, J. (Oral)

1. Present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the BNSS’) for grant of pre-arrest/anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.263 dated 19.09.2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC at Police Station Julana, District Jind.

2. The gravamen of the FIR in question pertains to defrauding the complainants namely Kamal son of Dharambir Singh, Pale Ram son of Rohtash, Jagbir son of Nafe Singh and Zile Singh son of Chandgri Ram, all residents of village Karontha, District Rohtak. It was alleged by the complainants that one Ranbir Singh, a property dealer from their village told them that a person namely Sudhir Kumar son of Ram Singh was also related to their village. The said Ranbir Singh introduced the complainants to said Sudhir Kumar as they were interested in buying some land. The said Sudhir Kumar apprised the complainants that he knew several people involved in property dealing and introduced them to Rakesh Kumar son of Satbir from village Karsola, District Jind. Thereafter, Rakesh Kumar told the complainants that Mahender (petitioner herein) owned land in village Killazafargarh and wanted to sell it. Subsequently, the complainants met Mahender (petitioner herein), who showed them documents claiming that he was the owner of 46 Kanals 8 Marlas of land in village Killazafargarh, Tehsil Julana, District Jind. The petitioner alleged that the land was in his name under an agreement to sell, but in reality, the said land actually belonged to Sandeep, Ravi, and Hoshiari. Thereafter the petitioner namely Mahender, prepared an agreement to sell dated 08.01.2024 in the presence ₹

of Sudhir Kumar and Rakesh Kumar and received a sum of 18.00 lacs in ₹ ₹

cash and 40 lakh by cheque i.e. a total of 58 lakh. The execution of the sale-deed was fixed on 30.09.2024. When the complainants later asked Mahender, Rakesh and Sudhir to register the sale-deed, they kept delaying the same on one pretext or the other. On checking the land records, the complainants discovered that the actual owners of the said land were Sandeep, Ravi and Hoshiari, who had already sold the said land to someone else. It was also found that Hoshiari was the aunt of Mahender (father’s sister) and Sandeep had been cultivating the land belonging to Ravi and Hoshiari. In this way, the petitioner namely Mahender alongwith Rakesh ₹

and Sudhir, cheated the complainants for a sum of 58 lakh by showing the fake documents and creating a false agreement to sell. When the complainants demanded their money back, the accused refused, misbehaved with them and threatened to kill them. On these set of allegations, instant FIR has been registered and investigation ensued.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question. Learned counsel has further iterated that the petitioner has entered into an agreement to sell the land in question on behalf of his aunt (i.e. bua) namely Smt. Hoshiari Devi, who is the actual owner of the land in question and that the complainants were fully aware of this fact at the time of execution of the agreement dated 08.01.2024. Learned counsel has further contended that the said Smt. Hoshiari Devi subsequently sold the land to some other buyer who offered a higher sale consideration and the petitioner has no control over this transaction. Learned counsel has further submitted that despite this fact the petitioner has already refunded substantial a