CRM-M-6190-20 IN THE H (133) GURDEEP SING STATE OF PUNJ CORAM: HON Present: Mr. Ms. R None MANISHA BATR 1. The under Section 48 “BNSS”) for gran 04.07.2023 regist Station Balongi, D No.64798-2023 order dated 21.11. 2. The a moved by the co measuring about 1 2026 (O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH SINGH Versus PUNJAB AND ANR. HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANIS Mr. Yashjot S. Dhaliwal, Advocate fo Ms. Ruchika Sabherwal, Senior DAG None for respondent No.2 **** BATRA, J. (ORAL) The instant one is the second petitio on 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Surak r grant of anticipatory bail in case ar registered under Sections 406, 420 ongi, District SAS Nagar. The previ 023 as filed by him had been dismis 21.11.2025. The aforementioned FIR was register the complainant Randhir Singh alle bout 154 Sq. Yds. at Village Mundi JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH CRM-M-6190-2026 (O&M) Date of decision : 19.05.2026 ... Petitioner ...Respondents ANISHA BATRA cate for the petitioner r DAG, Punjab petition preferred by the petitioner Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short case arising out of FIR No.98 dated 420 and 120B of IPC at Police previous petition bearing CRM-M dismissed for non-prosecution vide egistered on the basis of a complaint h alleging that he owned a house Mundi Kharar. He was introduced M) 2026 oner s ioner short ated olice M vide laint ouse uced AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.20 12:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-6190-20 with the petitioner The petitioner offe lakhs. A written amount of Rs.40,0 the outset. At Rs.4,50,000/- was of Rs.17,50,000/ of Rs.25,10,000/ also been dishono taken possession o No Objection Cer loan qua the sam petitioner had ask Raipur, District S remaining sale con sale consideration qua the said plot in alleging that the money to him and 3. After initiated and are u application for gra Learned Addition 07.12.2023. Ther 2026 (O&M) 2 itioner by accused Des Raj, who is a ffered to buy his property for a to ritten agreement was executed betwe s.40,000/- was given by the petitione At the time of execution of ag was transferred into his bank accou ,000/- was transferred in his bank acco ,000/- was not paid by the petitioner a ishonoured. The petitioner alongwith ssion of his property and also took th n Certificate (NOC) given by the Ba me property. At the time of ex ad asked the complainant to transfe trict SAS Nagar, Mohali in his na ale consideration amount but subseque ration amount and also he refused to plot in his favour rather he sold the sa t the petitioner and the co-accused m and had cheated him, he prayed for After registration of FIR, investiga d are underway. Apprehending his a grant of anticipatory bail which w ditional Sessions Judge, SAS Naga Thereafter, he filed CRM-M-64798 o is a property dealer by profession. or a total sale consideration of Rs.52 between them on 10.11.2017. An etitioner to him as earnest money at f agreement, another amount of account. Subsequently, an amount k account but the remaining amount oner and a cheque given by him had ngwith the co-accused had forcibly ook the original sale deed as well as Bank from whom he had taken of execution of the agreement, the ransfer his plot situated at Village his name, if he failed to pay the quently he did not give remaining sed to execute any agreement to sell the same to some other persons. By cused had caused wrongful loss of ed for taking action in the matter. vestigation proceedings have been his arrest, the petitioner moved an hich was dismissed by the Court of Nagar (Mohali) vide order dated 4798-2023 before this Court making sion. s.52 An ey at t of ount ount had cibly ll as aken the llage the ining sell By ss of been d an rt of ated king AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.20 12:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-6190-20 prayer for grant o directed to join undertook to pay agreed amount ha him had been dism 4. It has entire disputed a complainant. It w lakhs to the compl Moreso, his couns marriage. His cu investigation. It is 5. The r today, none has ap Court that the pe hence the petition 6. Per co maintainable bein change in the circ Custodial interrog thorough investiga to be allowed. 2026 (O&M) 3 grant of anticipatory bail. Vide ord join investigation. During the pe o pay certain amount of money to th unt had been paid, however, as on 21 n dismissed due to non-prosecution. It has been argued by learned coun ted amount of money has been p t. It was only due to the reason that h complainant earlier, that his previous counsel could not appear on 21.11.20 His custodial interrogation is not req n. It is, therefore, argued that the petiti The respondent No.2 had been app has appeared on his behalf. On 14.05 the petitioner had not honoured the t tition did not deserve to be allowed. Per contra, learned State counsel has e being the second petition. There he circumstances. The petitioner is terrogation of the petitioner is must vestigation. It is, therefore, argued tha order dated 06.03.2024, he was the pendency of that petition, he y to the complainant. Some of the on 21.11.2025, the petition filed by counsel for the petitioner that the een paid by the petitioner to the that he could not pay a sum of Rs.2 vious petition had not been allowed. .11.2025 as he was busy in his own ot required. He has already joined e petition deserves to be allowed. en appearing in person. However, 14.05.2026, he had stated before the d the terms of the compromise and wed. el has argued that this petition is not There is no drastic or substantive ner is misusing the process of law. must for the purpose of conducting ed that the petition does not deserve was , he f the d by t the the Rs.2 wed. own ined ever, e the and s not ntive law. cting serve AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.20 12:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-6190-20 7. This C for the parties at co 8. As al petitioner had bee plea that the comp and a perusal of th had been paid by the complainant- the petitioner has arrived at betwee cannot be given to some point of time long. The powers and extra-ordinary have been made o make out a prima petitioner. In ca Investigating Agen adversely effectin order of anticipa procedure of crim law that the powe in extra-ordinary taking into conside 2026 (O&M) 4 This Court has heard the rival submis es at considerable length. s already discussed above, the pre ad been dismissed for non-prosecution compromise has been arrived at betw l of the zimni orders passed in that pe id by the petitioner to the complainan -respondent No.2 while appearing r has failed to honour the terms of the etween them as on 15.02.2024. Ev iven to the compromise allegedly arr of time. The petitioner has been avoid owers for grant of pre-arrest bail are rdinary circumstances. However, no made out in favour of the petitioner prima facie case for commission of off In case custodial interrogation of th g Agency, that shall leave many glarin ffecting the investigation. The Court ticipatory bail does not operate as f criminal cases by the trial Court. It powers for grant of pre-arrest bail ar inary and exceptional circumstances onsideration the nature of the accusati ubmissions made by learned counsel he previous petition as filed by the cution. In the said petition also, the t between the parties had been taken hat petition reveals that some money lainant-respondent No.2. However, pearing in person has submitted that f the compromise which had been . Even otherwise much relevance ly arrived at between the parties at avoiding joining investigation since il are to be exercised in exceptional er, no such circumstance appears to tioner in this case. The allegations of offence of cheating as against the of the petitioner is denied to the glaring loopholes and gaps, thereby Court is also required to see that an ate as inroad in the normal legal urt. It is well settled proposition of ail are to be exercised by the Court ances and with great caution while ccusation and the sentence which the unsel the , the aken oney ever, that been ance es at since ional rs to tions t the the reby at an legal n of ourt hile h the AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.20 12:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-6190-20 conviction may en circumstance is, h For the purpose interrogation of t discussed facts, th to be dismissed. 9. It is m the purpose of dec on the merits of th 10. Since any, is rendered in 19.05.2026 Amit Sharma 2026 (O&M) 5 ay entail. In the instant case, no such e is, however, made out from the ple rpose of conducting thorough and p n of the petitioner is must. Taking cts, this Court is of the considered opi Accordingly the same is dismisse It is made clear that any observation of deciding the present petition and t s of the case. Since the main petition has been dism ered infructuous. (MA Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes Whether reportable:- Yes/No o such exceptional or extra-ordinary the pleas as taken by the petitioner. and proper investigation custodial aking into consideration the above red opinion that the petition deserves smissed. vation made hereinabove is only for and the same shall have no bearing dismissed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No inary oner. odial bove erves y for aring n, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.20 12:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.