IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 03.11.2025 Kulwant Singh ....Petitioner V/s State of Punjab ....Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. G.S. Randhawa, Advocate for the petitioner (through Video Conference).

Mr. Amit Goyal, Additional Advocate General, Punjab.

*****

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.81 dated 12.09.2025, registered for the offences punishable under Section 420 of IPC at Police Station Bhaini Mian Khan, District Gurdaspur. 2. The gravamen of the FIR in question pertains to misuse of matriculation certificate of the complainant namely, Kulwant Singh, son of Nishan Singh, a resident of Village Bholeke, Tehsil Batala, District Gurdaspur (Punjab). He alleged that the petitioner whose name is also Kulwant Singh, son of Han Singh, resident of Village Paswal, Post Office Mullanwal, District Gurdaspur had used his 10th class certificate and personal details to obtain passport No. S823312 fraudulently. It was alleged that the petitioner took the advantage of having the same name as the complainant and somehow obtained his 10^th Class certificate. Thereafter, the petitioner used the said certificate unlawfully to procure passport in his own name. As the complainant came to know about this, he inquired from his school i.e. Senior Secondary School, Rama Talwandi and also verified with the Punjab School Education Board, Sahibzada Ajit Singh Nagar (Mohali). Thereafter, the complainant informed the Passport Office in Amritsar which advised him to report this matter to the police. On these set of allegation, the instant FIR came to be registered and investigation ensued.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the allegations contained in the impugned FIR are vague, baseless and devoid of any substantive material. Learned counsel has further iterated that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated into the present FIR due to mistaken identity. Learned counsel has further contended that the petitioner has no concern whatsoever with the complainant who happens to bear the same name. It has been further argued that although both the petitioner and the complainant have the same roll number in the 10^th class examination, the serial numbers of their certificates are different — that of the petitioner being 7U116670 while that of the complainant is 9T7U120416 which clearly depicts that both the certificates have been separately issued by the Punjab School Education Board and the duplication of Roll numbers appears to be a clerical error on the part of the Board. Learned counsel has further submitted that the matriculation certificate of the petitioner has been verified multiple times by the competent authorities during his service in the Indian Army and subsequently in the Revenue Department, where presently the petitioner serves as a Patwari. Learned counsel has emphasized that the passport of the petitioner has been issued in the year 2005 and the same was renewed in the year 2018 after due verification and at no point any objection or irregularity has been raised by the Passport Office. It has been further contended that the entire case is documentary in nature and all relevant records are already in the possession of the investigating agency. It has been emphatically argued by learned counsel that the petitioner has never fabricated, forged or prepared any document(s) as alleged. The entire narrative in the FIR is concocted with the sole objective of pressurizing the petitioner. According to learned counsel, in the absence of substantive and convincing material, the entire prosecution narrative is nothing but an abuse of process. It has been further submitted that the petitioner, being a permanent resident and government employee may