##PAGE1##

CRM-M-15327-2026 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

234 CRM-M-15327-2026

Date of decision: 06.04.2026

JAGDEV SINGH ….Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB ....Respondent

CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL

Present:- Mr. Manvinder Sidhu, Advocate for for the petitioner.

Mr. Amit Shukla, DAG, Punjab.

*****

RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J. (ORAL)

1. Through the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”), the petitioners seek anticipatory bail in FIR No.37 dated 10.02.2026 registered under Section 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, at Police Station Civil Lines

Bathinda, District Bathinda.

2. On 24.03.2026, the following order was passed by this Court: -

“Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.37 dated 10.02.2026 registered under Section 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, at Police Station

Civil Lines Bathinda, District Bathinda.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submitted that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are false and frivolous and the petitioner had no

GURPREET

2026.04.07 12:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document.

CRM-M-15327-2026 2

dishonest intention to cheat the complainant. He argued that the agreement to sell dated 13.09.2024 was executed between the parties for total sale consideration of Rs.1.57 Crore per acre regarding which Rs.30 lakhs was given as earnest money (Rs.24 lakhs bank transaction and Rs.6 lakhs in cash) and the date of execution of sale deed was fixed on 30.06.2025. He further argued that it was the complainant who could not arrange the money and did not appear before the office of Sub-Registrar for execution of the sale deed, whereas, the petitioner after waiting for the complainant, had marked his presence before the Sub- Registrar, copy of proof of presence of the petitioner is annexed as Annexure P-2. He further argued that thereafter, the petitioner sent a legal notice (Annexure P-3) to the complainant mentioning therein that the complainant was not present to perform his part of agreement to sell and the earnest money given by the complainant stands forfeited but the complainant had not given any reply to the said legal notice. He further argued that if the contents of the FIR are taken to be true, even then the dispute in the present case is of civil nature, which has been given criminal colour by registering the present FIR. He further submitted that the entire case is based on documentary evidence which are already in possession of the complainant or the investigating agency, hence, nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner. Moreover, the petitioner has clean antecedents as he is not involved in any other case. No recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation as and

when called upon to do so by the investigating agency.

Notice of motion.

On asking of the Court, Mr. Ravinder Singh, DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State and seeks

time to file status report.

At this stage, Mr. Madan Sandhu, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant and filed his Memo of

GURPREET

2026.04.07 12:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document.

CRM-M-15327-2026 3

Appearance, which is taken on record. He, while opposing the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, has contended that the petitioner has cheated the complainant for a significant amount and thus, does not deserve the concession of

bail.

Adjourned to 06.04.2026.

In the meantime, the petitioner is directed to join investigation within a week from today and would appear as and when required by the Investigating Officer and cooperate with the Investigating