IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-19994-2026 (O&M)

Date of decision: 07.05.2026 TILAK RAJ ….Petitioner Versus STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR. ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Present:- Mr. G.S. Khosa, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Mohit Chaudhary, AAG Haryana.

..…

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.42 dated 25.03.2026 registered under Sections 61, 318(4), 316(3) of BNS, 2023, at Police Station Bhupani, District Faridabad.

2. Brief facts as per the prosecution case are that the petitioner in connivance with other co-accused, fraudulently executed an agreement to sell the plot belonging to the complainant and took Rs.5 lakhs as earnest money, which was never received by 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 submits that the petitioner has been roped in the present case because of the complainant’s fall-out with the primary accused in the FIR who happens to be ex-husband of the complainant. He argued that the allegations are being made against the petitioner after a delay of about 2 ½ years and that the complainant had wilfully entered into an agreement to sell with the petitioner and it was in fact the complainant who contacted the petitioner. Moreover, the petitioner has clean antecedents as he is not involved in any other case. The entire evidence is documentary, hence, nothing is to be recovered from him. 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, Faridabad, vide order dated

07.04.2026

5. 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 in collusion with other two co- accused fraudulently made the complainant to enter into agreement to sell regarding a plot. In the said agreement, the total value of the plot is mentioned as Rs.7 lakhs whereas its actual value as per the complainant is Rs.52,50,000/-. He has further argued that the petitioner fraudulently kept the original registry of the plot with himself. He further submits that the agreement to sell executed between the complainant and the petitioner appears to be fake because on the last page of the agreement to sell, there is space left for witness No.1 and witness No.2 and no one has signed on those spaces. He further submitted that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required to ascertain the modus operandi adopted by him and the co-accused and to trace the money trail and to recover the cheated amount. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the petition.

6. 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 petitioner, in connivance with the co-accused, induced the complainant to execute an agreement to sell in respect of the plot in question by allegedly misrepresenting its value. It has further come on record that while the sale consideration mentioned in the agreement to sell is Rs.7 la