105 (cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:3)(cid:5)(cid:1)(cid:7)(cid:5)(cid:3)(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:10)(cid:11)(cid:4)(cid:3)(cid:9)(cid:12)(cid:3)(cid:13)(cid:10)(cid:2)(cid:14)(cid:15)(cid:16)(cid:3)(cid:15)(cid:2)(cid:17)(cid:3)(cid:5)(cid:15)(cid:11)(cid:18)(cid:15)(cid:2)(cid:15)

AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 15.10.2025 Balbir Singh ..... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ ***

Present: Dr. Pankaj Nanhera, Advocate for the petitioner.

***

RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J.

1. Present petition has been filed praying for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.503, dated 05.08.2024, under Sections 120-B, 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered at Police Station Ballabgarh City, District Faridabad, Haryana. Further prayer has been made for the grant of interim bail to the petitioner during the pendency of the present petition.

2. Succinctly the facts of the case are that FIR in the present case was got registered on the statement of complainant, namely, Joginder Pal Babbar. It was alleged that brother of the complainant, namely, Mangat Lal Babbar had purchased a property, i.e. Plot No.15-16, Block E1, Sector 11, Faridabad from P. Shankar on 06.12.1985. It was alleged that Mangat Lal Babbar paid a consideration amount of Rs.1,24,820/- to P. Shankar. It was alleged that elder brother of the complainant, namely, Mangat Lal Babbar sold the said property to the complainant on 09.02.1989 for a consideration amount of Rs.1,87,250/-

and all the documents were transferred in his name and thus, the complainant was the sole owner of the abovesaid plot. It was alleged that father of the complainant died on 11.01.1986 and his brother, namely, Mangat Lal Babbar died on 16.08.1990. On the death of his father and brother, the complainant went in depression and thus, was unable to take care of the property. Thereafter the complainant went to the Municipal Council office, Faridabad to obtain the property ID and then, he discovered that the ID was already in someone else name. The complainant obtained a certified copy from the Sub Registrar’s office, Ballabgarh, which revealed that Sunaina Mishra, Anand Mishra and others had conspired to create forged and false documents and fraudulently transferred his property in the name of Sunaina Mishra through Will No.1993, dated 09.06.2023 and thus, committed a fraud. The complainant discovered that P. Shankar had already expired on 26.11.2015 and despite that, a fake Power of Attorney was made in favour of Sunaina Mishra 10 months after the death of P. Shankar. It was found in Column No.17 of the sale deed that P. Shankar was still alive. The complainant thus prayed to take legal action against the accused, who conspired to usurp his property by committed fraud with him. On registration of the FIR, the investigation commenced. During the investigation, complicity of the petitioner surfaced and thus, he was arrayed as an accused in the present case. 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 15.09.2025. Hence, being aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court by way of filing the present petition praying for the grant of anticipatory bail.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely and frivolously implicated in the present case without there being any evidence against him. He has submitted that the FIR has been registered on the basis of the complaint made by the complainant, namely, Joginder Pal Babbar, however, during the investigation, the Investigating Agencies found the documents produced before it to be forged and fabricated and