IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-12136-2026 Date of decision: 06.04.2026 JASWINDER SINGH GILL ….Petitioner Versus STATE OF PUNJAB ....Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Present:- Ms. Sukhdeep Kaur, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Amit Shukla, DAG Punjab.

Mr. Ramesh Chander Sharma, Advocate for the complainant.

..…

RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J. (ORAL)

1. 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.263 dated 28.12.2025 registered under Sections 120-B, 419, 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC, at Police Station Mehatpur, District Jalandhar Rural.

2. Brief facts as per the prosecution case are that the petitioner in connivance with other co-accused, got registered the sale deed on the basis of fake documents and cheated the complainant. Hence, the present FIR.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no connection with the alleged fraud. He argued that if the contents of the FIR are taken to be true, even then no specific role has been attributed to the present petitioner. He submits that there is no record to show the active involvement of the petitioner in the offence. He further submitted that the present dispute is civil in nature, which has been given criminal colour by lodging 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. He submits that there is an unexplained delay of 07 months in lodging of the FIR, thereby casting serious doubt on the prosecution story. Moreover, the petitioner has clean antecedents as he is not involved in any other case. Learned counsel for the petitioner 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. Hence, he prays that present petition be allowed.

4. After registration of the FIR, investigation has been initiated and is under way. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner had moved an application for grant of anticipatory bail which has been dismissed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalandhar, vide order dated

13.02.2026.

5. Learned counsel for the complainant has opposed to the grant of relief sought by the petitioner.

6. On the other hand, learned State counsel has filed the status report in the matter, which is taken on record and while referring to the same, he has opposed the prayer of the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail on the ground that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. He argued that the petitioner is specifically named in the FIR. He further argued that the petitioner had impersonated the complainant before Tehsildar and accordingly, fake document deed was entered in the register of Tehsildar. He submits that at the time of registration of forged transfer deed, photo of the petitioner was affixed but later on at the time of official registration of the deed, photo of the complainant was superimposed on the photo of the petitioner. He further submitted that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required to ascertain the modus operandi adopted by him. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the petition.

7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the material available on record, this Court is not inclined to grant the concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The allegations levelled in the FIR reveal a well-planned act of forgery and fraud in relation to the preparation and registration of the transfer deed dated 05.06.2023. The petitioner is specifically named in the FIR and is alleged to have played an active role in preparing the forged transfer deed and facilitating the superimposition of photographs at