IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH DATE OF DECISION: 09.02.2026 Lakhwinder Singh ........Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana .........Respondent CORAM HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHAS MEHLA Present Mr.P.S.Ahluwalia, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Siddharth Sihag, Advocate, Mr. Utkarsh Sheoran, Advocate and Ms. Simerpreet Sekhon, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Ramender Singh Chauhan, Asstt. AG, Haryana.

***

SUBHAS MEHLA, J (ORAL)

1. By way of present petition, petitioner is seeking regular bail in FIR No.003 dated 03.01.2023, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Gurgaon Sadar, Gurugram.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that there is no specific allegation against the petitioner that he has created any document or attempted to defraud the complainant; that, however, he is victim of the present fraud by co-accused Karan Bhatnagar as Karan Bhatnagar impersonated to be son of the complainant and approached the present petitioner and received Rs.5,00,000/- but after verifying the facts he came to know that he moved an application Annexure P-3 to Senior Superintendent of Police, Mohali, on which an enquiry Annexure P-4 has been conducted in the year 2021 and thereafter, he went abroad i.e U.K; no transaction has been completed or processed in his favour on the basis of the forged and fabricated General Power of Attorney by co-accused Karan Bhatnagar;

petitioner is arrested in the present matter on 17.11.2025 i.e for the last more than two months he is in custody; he was also remanded to police custody and now is in judicial custody; trial will take sufficient time and there is no evidence; even the case of the prosecution is that it is an attempt to sell the property of the complainant which is still in his possession and prayer for grant of regular bail to the petitioner is made.

3. On the other hand, Mr. Ramender Singh Chauhan, Asstt. AG, Haryana, appeared on behalf of State and opposed the bail petition on the ground that present petitioner in connivance with the co-accused Karan Bhatnagar tried to sell the property of the complainant on the basis of the forged documents; co-accused is not arrested yet and prayed for dismissal of the present petition. 4. Heard.

5. Keeping in view the facts of the present case and contentions raised by learned counsel for the petitioner that the present petitioner has already moved an application regarding the forgery committed with him by the co-accused, and on which, an enquiry has been held; petitioner has not created or forged any document nor he is a beneficiary of any transactions; he is having clear antecedents except one case which was registered against him under Section 323 IPC and lateron same was quashed by this Court; the present petitioner is in custody since 17.11.2025; the offences are triable by Magistrate Ist Class; trial will take sufficient time to conclude and no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping him in custody for any further period, as concession of bail cannot be denied just as measure of punishment as culpability of the accused will be decided at the final stage by the trial Court after appreciating the evidences adduced by both sides and it is trite principle of criminal jurisprudence that bail is rule, jail is an exception, this Court deems it a fit case to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner.

7. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.

09.02.2026 (SUBHAS MEHLA)

mamta JUDGE