CRM-M-16602 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT 121 ANWARPREET KAUR STATE OF CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Present : SURYA P petitioner under Section 482 of ‘the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023’. It has been filed with regard to a case arising out of FIR No. dated 09.10.2025 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B of Indian Penal Code Gate, Thanesar 2. ‘Manjot Singh’, hereinafter being referred to as ‘complainant’ only. It was stated by the above with accused No.1 16602-2026 (O&M) 8587 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH CRM DATE OF DECISION ANWARPREET KAUR VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA P Mr. Parminder Singh, Advocate Mr. Ramender Singh Chauhan, AAG Haryana Mr. Arun Gupta, Advocate for the complainant. SURYA PARTAP SINGH, J. This petition for pre-arrest bail is petitioner under Section 482 of ‘the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023’. It has been filed with regard to a case arising out of FIR No. 09.10.2025, for the commission of 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B of Indian Penal Code Thanesar District Kurukshetra. The abovementioned FIR came into being ‘Manjot Singh’, hereinafter being referred to as ‘complainant’ only. It was stated by the above-named complainant that accused No.1 Anwarpreet Kaur, and that he 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-16602-2026 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION : 25.03.2026 .....PETITIONER VERSUS .....RESPONDENT SURYA PARTAP SINGH , Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ramender Singh Chauhan, AAG Haryana. Mr. Arun Gupta, Advocate for the complainant. arrest bail is the first petition, filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of ‘the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023’. It has been filed with regard to a case arising out of FIR No.476 , for the commission of offence punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B of Indian Penal Code, Police Station Krishna FIR came into being at the instance of ‘Manjot Singh’, hereinafter being referred to as ‘complainant’ only. It was named complainant that his marriage was solemnized , and that he is the owner of a house .2026 .....PETITIONER .....RESPONDENT filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of ‘the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 476 offence punishable under Sections Krishna at the instance of ‘Manjot Singh’, hereinafter being referred to as ‘complainant’ only. It was his marriage was solemnized a house GAURAV THAKUR 2026.03.27 09:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-16602 situated in Model T persistent harassment shifted to when he returned, accused No.1, and later on he came to know that by introducing an impersonator got the abovementioned 3. alleged transfer deed was executed, proved that the abovementioned transfer deed is nothing, but an outcome of fraud and forgery 4. information, formal FIR of this case was lodged and the investigation up. 5. 6. behalf of respondent dispensed with. 7. the complainant and filed Power of Attorney. The same be taken on record. 8. 16602-2026 (O&M) 8587 situated in Model Town Thanesar. According to complainant, on account of persistent harassment by the accused No.1 and her family members, he shifted to U.K., where he worked for several years. when he returned, firstly he was not allowed accused No.1, and later on he came to know that by introducing an impersonator as the vendor of the abovementioned house, got the abovementioned house transferred in her own name. The complainant has further alleged that alleged transfer deed was executed, he was not in India and thus, it stands proved that the abovementioned transfer deed is nothing, but an outcome of and forgery. It is the case of the prosecution that information, formal FIR of this case was lodged and the investigation Notice of motion. Mr. Ramender Singh Chauhan, AAG Haryana behalf of respondent-State. Hence service of notice upon the State is hereby dispensed with. Mr. Arun Gupta, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant and filed Power of Attorney. The same be taken on record. Heard. 2 own Thanesar. According to complainant, on account of by the accused No.1 and her family members, he worked for several years. As per complainant, firstly he was not allowed to enter his house by the accused No.1, and later on he came to know that by introducing an of the abovementioned house, the accused No.1 house transferred in her own name. The complainant has further alleged that at the time when the was not in India and thus, it stands proved that the abovementioned transfer deed is nothing, but an outcome of It is the case of the prosecution that in view of abovementioned information, formal FIR of this case was lodged and the investigation taken Mr. Ramender Singh Chauhan, AAG Haryana appears on State. Hence service of notice upon the State is hereby Mr. Arun Gupta, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant and filed Power of Attorney. The same be taken on record. own Thanesar. According to complainant, on account of by the accused No.1 and her family members, he mplainant, se by the accused No.1, and later on he came to know that by introducing an the accused No.1 at the time when the was not in India and thus, it stands proved that the abovementioned transfer deed is nothing, but an outcome of oned taken appears on State. Hence service of notice upon the State is hereby Mr. Arun Gupta, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant and filed Power of Attorney. The same be taken on record. GAURAV THAKUR 2026.03.27 09:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-16602 9. petitioner and a sufferer herself complainant himself is guilty of another lady and went to U.K. no option, but to take care members. when the respectable resolve the dispute release deed was executed, but now by backing out of his stand, the complainant is alleging that the help of an impersonator. 10. petitioner that property in the name of petitioner can be gauged from the fact that for long time, after the execution same was lodged only when on account of persistent complainant against him and that the transfer deed is an outcome learned counsel for the for the petitioner 11. for the complainant, has controverted the abovementioned arguments. 16602-2026 (O&M) 8587 It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is an innocent lady and in fact, she is and a sufferer herself. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, complainant himself is guilty of matrimonial lady and went to U.K. and in his absence, the petitioner was left with option, but to take care of her minor members. As per learned counsel for the petitioner, when the respectable members of the community were approached to resolve the dispute with the complainant, with the consent of complainant, release deed was executed, but now by backing out of his stand, the complainant is alleging that the transfer help of an impersonator. It has further been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the consent of the complainant with regard to transfer of property in the name of petitioner can be gauged from the fact that for long time, after the execution of release deed, he did not same was lodged only when on account of persistent complainant, the petitioner lodged the FIR under Section 498A of IPC him. While claiming that there was no the transfer deed is an outcome learned counsel for the petitioner has sought petitioner. The learned State Counsel, being assisted by learned counsel for the complainant, has controverted the abovementioned arguments. 3 It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that and in fact, she is a victim of circumstances According to learned counsel for the petitioner, matrimonial misconduct, as he eloped with and in his absence, the petitioner was left with minor child with the help of her family As per learned counsel for the petitioner, in such circumstances of the community were approached to with the complainant, with the consent of complainant, release deed was executed, but now by backing out of his stand, the transfer deed has been executed with the been contended by learned counsel for the nt of the complainant with regard to transfer of property in the name of petitioner can be gauged from the fact that for long of release deed, he did not lodge the FIR and the same was lodged only when on account of persistent cruelty of the the petitioner lodged the FIR under Section 498A of IPC While claiming that there was no mens rea to commit fraud the transfer deed is an outcome of consent of the complainant, the petitioner has sought for the benefit of pre-arrest bail The learned State Counsel, being assisted by learned counsel for the complainant, has controverted the abovementioned arguments. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that of circumstances According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the with and in his absence, the petitioner was left with family in such circumstances of the community were approached to with the complainant, with the consent of complainant, a release deed was executed, but now by backing out of his stand, the deed has been executed with the been contended by learned counsel for the nt of the complainant with regard to transfer of property in the name of petitioner can be gauged from the fact that for long lodge the FIR and the elty of the the petitioner lodged the FIR under Section 498A of IPC to commit fraud , the arrest bail The learned State Counsel, being assisted by learned counsel for the complainant, has controverted the abovementioned arguments. GAURAV THAKUR 2026.03.27 09:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-16602 According to learned counsel for the complain bottom line, which has owner of the property in question and executed the transfer deed of petitioner. As per learned counsel for the the property was earlier vesting in the husband of the petitioner and the petitioner was present at the time be any explanation under what circumstances somebody else forged the signatures According to learned counsel for the complainant, the offence case is prima facie not entitled 12. 13. settled principles of law that the Court must be circumspect exercising power for grant of anticipatory bail and it should not be granted as a matter of rule. Rather as per law the abovesaid benefit should be granted only when the Court is convinced that exceptional circumstances exist for the extraordinary remedy. 14. India in the ca SC 282, has observed that power to grant anticipatory bail is extraordinary power, and that irrespective of the fact that in a number of cases, it has been 16602-2026 (O&M) 8587 According to learned counsel for the complain line, which has no explanation, is that owner of the property in question and executed the transfer deed of petitioner. As per learned counsel for the the property was earlier vesting in the husband of the petitioner and the petitioner was present at the time of execution of transfer deed, there cannot be any explanation under what circumstances somebody else forged the signatures of complainant (petitioner’s husband) According to learned counsel for the complainant, the offence prima facie established against the petitioner, and not entitled for the benefit of pre-arrest bail. The record has been perused carefully. As far as the benefit of anticipatory bail is concerned, it is settled principles of law that the Court must be circumspect exercising power for grant of anticipatory bail and it should not be granted matter of rule. Rather as per law the abovesaid benefit should be granted only when the Court is convinced that exceptional circumstances exist for the extraordinary remedy. With regard to such situation, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Srikant Upadhyay v. State of Bihar 2024 SCC OnLine SC 282, has observed that power to grant anticipatory bail is extraordinary power, and that irrespective of the fact that in a number of cases, it has been 4 According to learned counsel for the complainant, in the present case the , is that somebody appeared as owner of the property in question and executed the transfer deed in the name of petitioner. As per learned counsel for the complainant, since the title of the property was earlier vesting in the husband of the petitioner and the execution of transfer deed, there cannot be any explanation under what circumstances somebody else forged the (petitioner’s husband) on the transfer deed. According to learned counsel for the complainant, the offence in the present against the petitioner, and therefore, she is arrest bail. he record has been perused carefully. As far as the benefit of anticipatory bail is concerned, it is settled principles of law that the Court must be circumspect, while exercising power for grant of anticipatory bail and it should not be granted matter of rule. Rather as per law the abovesaid benefit should be granted only when the Court is convinced that exceptional circumstances exist for With regard to such situation, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of se of Srikant Upadhyay v. State of Bihar 2024 SCC OnLine SC 282, has observed that power to grant anticipatory bail is extraordinary power, and that irrespective of the fact that in a number of cases, it has been in the present case the somebody appeared as the in the name title of the property was earlier vesting in the husband of the petitioner and the execution of transfer deed, there cannot be any explanation under what circumstances somebody else forged the on the transfer deed. in the present therefore, she is As far as the benefit of anticipatory bail is concerned, it is while exercising power for grant of anticipatory bail and it should not be granted matter of rule. Rather as per law the abovesaid benefit should be granted only when the Court is convinced that exceptional circumstances exist for With regard to such situation, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of se of Srikant Upadhyay v. State of Bihar 2024 SCC OnLine SC 282, has observed that power to grant anticipatory bail is extraordinary power, and that irrespective of the fact that in a number of cases, it has been GAURAV THAKUR 2026.03.27 09:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-16602 held that bail is a rule, it cannot; by any anticipatory bail is a rule. 15. case has further observed that rule of anticipatory bail is a question of judicial discretion depending upon the facts and According to Hon'ble Apex Court, when called upon to exercise the abovesaid power the Court concerned has to be very cautious, as the grant of interim protection to the accused in serious cases may lead to miscarriage of justice and may hamper the investigation. 16. Vishwajeet Jadhav v. The State of Maharashtra and Another (Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 10255 of 2024, decided on 21.07.2024), the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has held that anticipatory bail is an exceptional remedy and it ought not be granted in a routine manner. As per the Hon'ble Supreme Court, there must exist strong reasons for extending indulgence of this extraordinary remedy to a person 17. 1980 SCC (2) 565, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India held that: 16602-2026 (O&M) 8587 held that bail is a rule, it cannot; by any anticipatory bail is a rule. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the abovementioned case has further observed that rule of anticipatory bail is a question of judicial discretion depending upon the facts and According to Hon'ble Apex Court, when called upon to exercise the abovesaid power the Court concerned has to be very cautious, as the grant of interim protection to the accused in serious cases may lead to miscarriage of and may hamper the investigation. Similarly, in the case of Nikita Jagganath Shetty alias Nikita Vishwajeet Jadhav v. The State of Maharashtra and Another (Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 10255 of 2024, decided on 21.07.2024), the Hon'ble me Court of India has held that anticipatory bail is an exceptional remedy and it ought not be granted in a routine manner. As per the Hon'ble Supreme Court, there must exist strong reasons for extending indulgence of this extraordinary remedy to a person accused of grave offence. In the case of Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia etc. v. State of Punjab 1980 SCC (2) 565, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India held that: (i) The power under Section 438, Criminal Procedure Code, is of an extraordinary character and mus exceptional cases only. (ii) In addition to the limitations mentioned in Section 437, the petitioner must make out a special case for the exercise of the power to grant anticipatory bail. 5 stretch of imagination, be said that The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the abovementioned case has further observed that rule of anticipatory bail is a question of judicial discretion depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case. According to Hon'ble Apex Court, when called upon to exercise the abovesaid power the Court concerned has to be very cautious, as the grant of interim protection to the accused in serious cases may lead to miscarriage of and may hamper the investigation. Similarly, in the case of Nikita Jagganath Shetty alias Nikita Vishwajeet Jadhav v. The State of Maharashtra and Another (Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 10255 of 2024, decided on 21.07.2024), the Hon'ble me Court of India has held that anticipatory bail is an exceptional remedy and it ought not be granted in a routine manner. As per the Hon'ble Supreme Court, there must exist strong reasons for extending indulgence of accused of grave offence. In the case of Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia etc. v. State of Punjab 1980 SCC (2) 565, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India held that:- The power under Section 438, Criminal Procedure Code, is of an extraordinary character and must be exercised sparingly in In addition to the limitations mentioned in Section 437, the petitioner must make out a special case for the exercise of the power to grant anticipatory bail. stretch of imagination, be said that The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the abovementioned case has further observed that rule of anticipatory bail is a question of circumstances of each case. According to Hon'ble Apex Court, when called upon to exercise the abovesaid power the Court concerned has to be very cautious, as the grant of interim protection to the accused in serious cases may lead to miscarriage of Similarly, in the case of Nikita Jagganath Shetty alias Nikita Vishwajeet Jadhav v. The State of Maharashtra and Another (Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 10255 of 2024, decided on 21.07.2024), the Hon'ble me Court of India has held that anticipatory bail is an exceptional remedy and it ought not be granted in a routine manner. As per the Hon'ble Supreme Court, there must exist strong reasons for extending indulgence of In the case of Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia etc. v. State of Punjab The power under Section 438, Criminal Procedure Code, is of t be exercised sparingly in In addition to the limitations mentioned in Section 437, the petitioner must make out a special case for the exercise of the GAURAV THAKUR 2026.03.27 09:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-16602 18. denial of the fact that complainant. It is also an admitted fact that on the date 08.05.2023 transfer deed was executed, the complainant was not prima facie was executed had been vest the petitioner, the petitioner cannot aware of the identity of the transferor. 19. of transfer deed by an impersonator stands established, and petitioner is the beneficiary held that the gravity of offence allegedly c not warrant a lenient view. 20. custodial interrogation of the present case, if such right is den 16602-2026 (O&M) 8587 (iii) Where a legitimate case for the police custody under Section 167(2) can be made out by the investigating agency or a reasonable claim to secure incriminating material from information likely to be received from the offender under Section 27 of the Evidence A be made out, the power under Section 438 should not be exercised. A perusal of record shows that i denial of the fact that the petitioner is the legally wedded complainant. It is also an admitted fact that on the date 08.05.2023 transfer deed was executed, the complainant was not prima facie established that the transfer deed executed in favour of petitioner was executed by an impersonator. Since the title of the property had been vested in the complainant and the complainant is the husband of the petitioner, the petitioner cannot even of the identity of the transferor. Taking into consideration the fact that apparently the execution of transfer deed by an impersonator stands established, and petitioner is the beneficiary of abovementioned fraudulent act held that the gravity of offence allegedly c not warrant a lenient view. It shall not be out of place to mention here that right of custodial interrogation of the Investigating Agency is a valuable right the present case, if such right is denied to the 6 Where a legitimate case for the remand of the offender to the police custody under Section 167(2) can be made out by the investigating agency or a reasonable claim to secure incriminating material from information likely to be received from the offender under Section 27 of the Evidence Act can be made out, the power under Section 438 should not be A perusal of record shows that in the present case, there is no petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the complainant. It is also an admitted fact that on the date 08.05.2023, when the transfer deed was executed, the complainant was not in India. Thus, it is established that the transfer deed executed in favour of petitioner an impersonator. Since the title of the property in question in the complainant and the complainant is the husband of even take a defence that she was not Taking into consideration the fact that apparently the execution of transfer deed by an impersonator stands established, and that of abovementioned fraudulent act, it is hereby held that the gravity of offence allegedly committed by the petitioner does It shall not be out of place to mention here that right of ting Agency is a valuable right, and in ied to the Investigating Agency it is remand of the offender to the police custody under Section 167(2) can be made out by the investigating agency or a reasonable claim to secure incriminating material from information likely to be received ct can be made out, the power under Section 438 should not be n the present case, there is no of the , when the Thus, it is established that the transfer deed executed in favour of petitioner in question in the complainant and the complainant is the husband of that she was not Taking into consideration the fact that apparently the execution that the , it is hereby by the petitioner does It shall not be out of place to mention here that right of and in it is GAURAV THAKUR 2026.03.27 09:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-16602 likely to result into miscarriage of justice, as the investigation proper headway identity of the person, who had impersonated himself as owner of the property, is yet to be established and for that purpose, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is of utmost importance. 21. above-discussed circumstances exist in this case, which may call for the discretion Thus, it is hereby held dismissal. Accordingly, the same is 22. shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 23. application 25.03.2026 Gaurav Thakur Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable 16602-2026 (O&M) 8587 likely to result into miscarriage of justice, as the investigation proper headway. In the present case, this fact can’t be ignored identity of the person, who had impersonated himself as owner of the rty, is yet to be established and for that purpose, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is of utmost importance. If the fact-situation of instant case discussed principles of law, it transpires that circumstances exist in this case, which may call for the discretionary jurisdiction, vested in this Court it is hereby held that the present petition . Accordingly, the same is hereby It is, however, clarified that the observations made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. Since the main petition has been dismissed, pending plications, if any, are rendered infructuous. .2026 (SURYA PA Whether speaking/reasoned :Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No 7 likely to result into miscarriage of justice, as the investigation may not take a this fact can’t be ignored that the identity of the person, who had impersonated himself as owner of the rty, is yet to be established and for that purpose, custodial interrogation situation of instant case is analyzed in the light of , it transpires that no such exceptional circumstances exist in this case, which may call for the exercise of this Court for grant of anticipatory bail. petition is devoid of merits deserve hereby dismissed. It is, however, clarified that the observations made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. Since the main petition has been dismissed, pending rendered infructuous. SURYA PARTAP SINGH) JUDGE :Yes/No : Yes/No may not take a that the identity of the person, who had impersonated himself as owner of the rty, is yet to be established and for that purpose, custodial interrogation is analyzed in the light of ptional exercise of for grant of anticipatory bail. deserves It is, however, clarified that the observations made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. Since the main petition has been dismissed, pending GAURAV THAKUR 2026.03.27 09:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document