SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 20432

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
JARNAIL SINGH BAJWA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER – Respondent



IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

271 CRM-M-48407-2025 (O&M)

Date of Decision : 11.11.2025 JARNAIL SINGH BAJWA …. PETITIONER V/S STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER …. RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHAS MEHLA Present : Mr. Nikhil Ghai, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Animesh Sharma, Addl. A.G., Punjab.

****

SUBHAS MEHLA, J. (Oral)

1. This is the third petition filed under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 seeking regular bail in case bearing FIR No.28 dated 29.07.2024, under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC registered at Police Station Punjab State Crime, District SAS Nagar, Mohali.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the complainant-Sucha Singh was the owner of 16 kanal, 02 marla of land in Village Hassanpur, District SAS Nagar (Mohali) and the petitioner for development of a project on the said land, had furnished a fake consent letter of the complainant to the authorities concerned. In the year 2016, M/s Bajwa Developers Ltd sought approval for their mega project named Sunny Enclave Village Jandpur, Sihanpur, Hassanpur, Sector 122, 123, 124, 125 from GMADA. The project was approved by GMADA. The officials of GMADA approved the project in his land without his consent. GMADA officials illegally approved Shamlat land measuring 3.426 acres of Village Shinpur, reserved for E.W.S. flats in this mega project which was shamlat land. So there was a conspiracy between M/s Bajwa Developers Pvt. Ltd., Chief Town Planner, GMADA and other officials of GMADA. Inquiry was conducted by Inspector Jasvir Kaur, Vigilance Bureau who observed that Sucha Singh has entered into an agreement to sell of land measuring 2 acres and 2 marlas situated in Village Hassanpur with M/s Bajwa Developers Pvt. Ltd. On 18.05.2015, the petitioner got executed sale deed of 1 acre and 1 marla from the complainant but since the entire payment was not made as per the agreement to sell, the complainant had filed a civil suit in which stay was granted. As per agreement to sell dated 18.05.2015, the sale deed of the remaining land was yet to be registered. In the year 2016, M/s Bajwa Developers Pvt. Ltd. started their project in Sunny Enclave, Sector 122, 123, 124, 125 for which they got approval from GMADA for acquiring the land of Village Hassanpur, Jandpur, Shihnpur. On 06.04.2016 when M/s Bajwa Developers Pvt. Ltd. had applied for approval with GMADA and they had annexed the consent letters of the persons with whom they had entered into agreements to sell. M/s Bajwa Developers Pvt. Ltd. submitted a forged consent letter of the complainant-Sucha Singh regarding his land measuring 01 acre & 01 marla despite that no sale deed of said land was not executed in their favour. During inquiry it was found that the stamp of the stamp vendors and register number, date were forged. Advocate Manbir Singh Notary Public has also stated that he had attested the said stamp papers at the instance of employees of the petitioner-Jarnail Singh Bajwa namely Deepak, Sukhjit and Shampy as they were known to him. The stamp papers were allegedly sold on

15.10.2010 while the agreement to sell was executed on 18.05.2015.

3. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case by the complainant just to extort money from him by giving the colors of a civil dispute to a criminal dispute. He further contended that the complainant had voluntarily given consent in the year 2010; the petitioner’s company developed roads/ sewerage on land and the complainant himself entered into agreement to sell in 2015. He further contended that the petitioner showed his bona fide by offering to pay balance with interest. He also contended that the petitioner had already settled several disputes and multiple FIRs against him were quashed on the basis of compromise and has also been granted regular bail in other FIRs of similar nature. In order to support his contentions, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top