IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.68104 of 2025 Date of Decision: 09.03.2026 Paramvir ..... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ ***

Present: Mr. Ajay Pal Singh, Advocate for Mr. C. R. Dahiya, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Tanuj Sharma, AAG, Haryana.

Mr. Baljeet Beniwal, Advocate for the complainant.

***

RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J.

1. Present petition has been filed praying for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.742, dated 22.11.2023, under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC, registered at Police Station City Ballabgarh, District Faridabad.

2. Succinctly, the facts of the case are that FIR in the present case was got registered on the statement of complainant, namely, Mandhir Maan, s/o Rattan Singh Mann. It was alleged that Paramvir (petitioner), Rajesh Gupta and Ranvir were involved in selling of properties and swindling money by preparing agreement with forged documents. Rajesh and Ranvir were working as property dealers and told the complainant that H. No.85, Sector 29, measuring 250 sq. Yards was for sale and Paramvir, i.e. the petitioner was the owner of the same. Rajesh Gupta and Ranvir got fixed the meeting of the complainant with Paramvir (petitioner) and the deal was done for an amount of Rs.1 Crore. The agreement to sell was executed on 23.11.2021 in the presence of co- accused, namely, Rajesh Gupta and Ranvir. It was alleged that Earnest money of Rs.20,00,000/- was paid and thereafter, on 01.02.2022, an amount of Rs.10,00,000/- was paid. Balance amount was to be paid at the time of registration of sale deed. Rajesh Gupta and Ranvir put their signatures on the agreement as the witnesses in the presence of notary. Later on, the complainant realized that Paramvir (petitioner) was avoiding to execute the registered sale deed and took money at the instance of Rajesh Gupta and Ranvir. They were not disclosing the reasons for not getting the sale deed registered. Thus, the complainant got suspicious and, therefore, inquired about the property from HUDA and then, it was transpired that the property was neither in the name of Paramvir nor any document was there in respect of ownership of the said property. The complainant informed Rajesh Gupta and Ranvir about the alleged fraud as committed with him but they started putting off the matter and avoided to meet him. When the complainant demanded back the amount of Rs.30,00,000/- given to them, they started to threaten him. Thus, the complainant found that he was cheated by all the accused and, thus, request was made to take legal action against them. On the basis of the complaint, the FIR was registered. On registration of the FIR, the investigation commenced. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner approached the Court of learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Faridabad praying for the grant of anticipatory bail. However, after hearing both the sides and finding no merit in the same, the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Faridabad declined the bail application filed by the petitioner vide order dated 20.11.2025. Hence being aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court praying for the grant of anticipatory bail by way of filing the present petition.

3. This Court vide order dated 04.12.2025, on the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is ready to execute the sale deed, no coercive action was ordered to be taken against the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has submitted that admittedly, the case is purely of a civil nature. He has further submitted that there is no evidence against the petitioner which connects him in the alleged offence. He has submitted that till today, the petitioner is the owner in possession of the property in question and he is fully competent and legally authorized to exec