CRM-M-23797 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT (109) MANOJ KUMAR CENTRAL BUREA CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present: Ms. Mr. Ravi Kamal Gupta, for the respondent Mr. P.S. Ahluwalia, Senior Advocate with Ms. **** MANISHA BATRA, J. (ORAL) 1. The Section 483 of for grant of regular bail in cases bearing RC No.0512023S00012 & RC No.0512023S00013 15.11.2023 registered under Section 120 427, 148, 149, 408, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 193 SCB, Chandigarh 2. Vide direction had been issued by this Court to the respondent 23797-2026 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM Date of decision : KUMAR Versus CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, CHANDIGARH HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Ms. Tanu Bedi, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Ravi Kamal Gupta, Special P for the respondent-CBI Mr. P.S. Ahluwalia, Senior Advocate with Ms. Keerat Dhillon, Advocate for the complainant **** MANISHA BATRA, J. (ORAL) The instant petition has been petition Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for grant of regular bail in cases bearing RC No.0512023S00012 & RC No.0512023S00013 (For short RC-12 and RC 15.11.2023 registered under Section 120-B read with Sections 452, 323, 506, 427, 148, 149, 408, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 193 SCB, Chandigarh. Vide order dated 18.10.2023 passed in CRM direction had been issued by this Court to the respondent IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-23797-2026 (O&M) Date of decision :27.07.2026 ... Petitioner OF INVESTIGATION, CHANDIGARH ...Respondent HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Advocate for the petitioner Public Prosecutor Mr. P.S. Ahluwalia, Senior Advocate with Dhillon, Advocate for the complainant petition filed by the petitioner under Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for grant of regular bail in cases bearing RC No.0512023S00012 & RC 12 and RC-13 respectively) dated B read with Sections 452, 323, 506, 427, 148, 149, 408, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 193 of IPC at Police Station CBI, order dated 18.10.2023 passed in CRM-M-6340-2023, a direction had been issued by this Court to the respondent-CBI to conduct .. Petitioner ...Respondent filed by the petitioner under Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for grant of regular bail in cases bearing RC No.0512023S00012 & RC dated B read with Sections 452, 323, 506, of IPC at Police Station CBI, a CBI to conduct AMIT SHARMA 2026.07.27 16:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-23797 investigation in cases bearing FIR No. Sections 452, 323, 506, 427, 120B, 148 and 149 of IPC at Police Station Zirakpur, District SAS Nagar (Mohali) bearing FIR No.303 dated 04.10.2023 registered under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC at Police Station Dera (Mohali) (For short “FIR No.303”) 3. FIR No.133 was lodged by Harjit Singh, Manager of Guru Nanak Vidhya as “complainant Zirakpur Patiala Road had been purchased by the complainant year 1986 and land, accused and Sarabjit Singh registered a separate Trust with the name similar to that of the complainant Trust and had got prepared different documents. Inquiries were pending different offices with regard to the said Trust. He alleged that on 10.03.2022, the accused Rajesh Kumar Gabba inside the land of the Trust by being armed with deadly weapons. The security guards standing at the gate of t weapons. Injuries were caused to them and their phones as well as CCTV cameras installed there and all this was done to take illegal possession of the land of the Trust. Special Investigation Team (SIT) was constituted and charge 23797-2026 (O&M) 2 investigation in cases bearing FIR No.133 dated 10.03.2022 registered under Sections 452, 323, 506, 427, 120B, 148 and 149 of IPC at Police Station Zirakpur, District SAS Nagar (Mohali) (For short “FIR No.133”) bearing FIR No.303 dated 04.10.2023 registered under Sections 420, 465, 7, 468 and 471 of IPC at Police Station Dera (For short “FIR No.303”). FIR No.133 was lodged by Harjit Singh, Manager of Guru Vidhya Bhandar Trust, Daryaganj, New Delhi (now to be mentioned as “complainant Trust”), alleging therein that 32 bighas of land situated at Zirakpur Patiala Road had been purchased by the complainant year 1986 and it was in possession of the same. With intent to grab the said accused Sanjeev Kumar Gatha, Rajesh Kumar and Sarabjit Singh hatched a conspiracy with registered a separate Trust with the name similar to that of the complainant Trust and had got prepared different documents. Inquiries were pending nt offices with regard to the said Trust. He alleged that on 10.03.2022, Rajesh Kumar Gabba alongwith his 10 inside the land of the Trust by being armed with deadly weapons. The security guards standing at the gate of the said land were assaulted with . Injuries were caused to them and their phones as well as CCTV cameras installed therein were damaged. Threats were extended to the guards and all this was done to take illegal possession of the land of the Trust. Special Investigation Team (SIT) was constituted and charge 133 dated 10.03.2022 registered under Sections 452, 323, 506, 427, 120B, 148 and 149 of IPC at Police Station (For short “FIR No.133”) and case bearing FIR No.303 dated 04.10.2023 registered under Sections 420, 465, 7, 468 and 471 of IPC at Police Station Dera Bassi, District SAS Nagar FIR No.133 was lodged by Harjit Singh, Manager of Guru Bhandar Trust, Daryaganj, New Delhi (now to be mentioned ”), alleging therein that 32 bighas of land situated at Zirakpur Patiala Road had been purchased by the complainant-Trust in the was in possession of the same. With intent to grab the said Sanjeev Kumar Gatha, Rajesh Kumar Gaba, Rajinder Kumar hatched a conspiracy with their accomplices and had got registered a separate Trust with the name similar to that of the complainant Trust and had got prepared different documents. Inquiries were pending in nt offices with regard to the said Trust. He alleged that on 10.03.2022, alongwith his 10-12 accomplices entered inside the land of the Trust by being armed with deadly weapons. The he said land were assaulted with . Injuries were caused to them and their phones as well as CCTV were damaged. Threats were extended to the guards and all this was done to take illegal possession of the land of the Trust. A Special Investigation Team (SIT) was constituted and charge-sheet was filed 133 dated 10.03.2022 registered under Sections 452, 323, 506, 427, 120B, 148 and 149 of IPC at Police Station and case bearing FIR No.303 dated 04.10.2023 registered under Sections 420, 465, Bassi, District SAS Nagar FIR No.133 was lodged by Harjit Singh, Manager of Guru Bhandar Trust, Daryaganj, New Delhi (now to be mentioned ”), alleging therein that 32 bighas of land situated at Trust in the was in possession of the same. With intent to grab the said Gaba, Rajinder Kumar had got registered a separate Trust with the name similar to that of the complainant in nt offices with regard to the said Trust. He alleged that on 10.03.2022, 12 accomplices entered inside the land of the Trust by being armed with deadly weapons. The he said land were assaulted with . Injuries were caused to them and their phones as well as CCTV were damaged. Threats were extended to the guards A sheet was filed AMIT SHARMA 2026.07.27 16:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-23797 as against the co as the present petitioner. 4. FIR No.303 was registered on the basis of complaint filed by Inder Deep alleging that Sarabjit Singh and Rajinder Kumar had created and utilized forged documents to claim ownership and possession of the land owned by the complainant Trust. 5. After re respectively, a composite challan was presented vide order dated 29.03.2025. The Court of Learned Special Judicial Magistrate, CBI, Mohali, summoned the present petitioner and the above 29.03.2025 as an application for grant of regular bail which has been dismissed by the Court of Learned Special Judge, CBI, SAS Nagar (Mohali) vide order dated 31.10.2025. 6. It is argued by learned counsel named in either of the FIRs bearing No.133 and 303. He was named subsequently in FIR No.133 and was released on bail. He concession of the same. Composite challan by CBI was filed much later but he was never arrested by CBI creation of any false or fabricated documents by him and his role has been confined to committing trespass in the land of the Trust. He himself has 23797-2026 (O&M) 3 as against the co-accused Sanjeev Kumar Gatha, Rajesh Kumar Gaba as well as the present petitioner. FIR No.303 was registered on the basis of complaint filed by alleging that accused Sanjeev Kumar Gatha Sarabjit Singh and Rajinder Kumar had created and utilized forged documents to claim ownership and possession of the land owned by the complainant After re-registration of both the above respectively, a composite challan was presented vide order dated 29.03.2025. The Court of Learned Special Judicial Magistrate, CBI, Mohali, summoned the present petitioner and the above-named persons vide order dated 29.03.2025 as accused. The petitioner surrendered on 15.07.2025. He moved an application for grant of regular bail which has been dismissed by the Court of Learned Special Judge, CBI, SAS Nagar (Mohali) vide order dated It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he was named in either of the FIRs bearing No.133 and 303. He was named in FIR No.133 and was released on bail. He concession of the same. Composite challan by CBI was filed much later but s never arrested by CBI during investigation creation of any false or fabricated documents by him and his role has been confined to committing trespass in the land of the Trust. He himself has accused Sanjeev Kumar Gatha, Rajesh Kumar Gaba as well FIR No.303 was registered on the basis of complaint filed by Sanjeev Kumar Gatha, Rajesh Kumar, Sarabjit Singh and Rajinder Kumar had created and utilized forged documents to claim ownership and possession of the land owned by the complainant above FIRs as RC No.12 and 13 respectively, a composite challan was presented vide order dated 29.03.2025. The Court of Learned Special Judicial Magistrate, CBI, Mohali, summoned named persons vide order dated The petitioner surrendered on 15.07.2025. He moved an application for grant of regular bail which has been dismissed by the Court of Learned Special Judge, CBI, SAS Nagar (Mohali) vide order dated for the petitioner that he was not named in either of the FIRs bearing No.133 and 303. He was named in FIR No.133 and was released on bail. He never misused the concession of the same. Composite challan by CBI was filed much later but during investigation. There is no allegation of creation of any false or fabricated documents by him and his role has been confined to committing trespass in the land of the Trust. He himself has accused Sanjeev Kumar Gatha, Rajesh Kumar Gaba as well FIR No.303 was registered on the basis of complaint filed by , Rajesh Kumar, Sarabjit Singh and Rajinder Kumar had created and utilized forged documents to claim ownership and possession of the land owned by the complainant FIRs as RC No.12 and 13 respectively, a composite challan was presented vide order dated 29.03.2025. The Court of Learned Special Judicial Magistrate, CBI, Mohali, summoned named persons vide order dated The petitioner surrendered on 15.07.2025. He moved an application for grant of regular bail which has been dismissed by the Court of Learned Special Judge, CBI, SAS Nagar (Mohali) vide order dated not named in either of the FIRs bearing No.133 and 303. He was named never misused the concession of the same. Composite challan by CBI was filed much later but . There is no allegation of creation of any false or fabricated documents by him and his role has been confined to committing trespass in the land of the Trust. He himself has AMIT SHARMA 2026.07.27 16:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-23797 surrendered before the Court. He ingredients for commission of offences of cheating and forgery are not at all attracted qua him. His continued detention will not serve any useful purpose. On account of his involvement in other cases, he cannot be de bail. The chances of conclusion of trial in the near future are bleak as only 02 out of 145 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far. It is also argued that his further incarceration is in violation of his rights of personal libert and release on bail as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and it is thus, urged that the petition deserves to be allowed. 7. Per contra, learned learned Senior counsel for the complainant have v allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature as by hatching a conspiracy, the co documents and used the same as genuine while making a supplementary trust deed. It is further argued that criminally trespassed into the land owned by the complainant damaged the CCTV cameras, had stolen the inverter batteries, LED Screen, wifi router and trust land with intent to grab the land of the complainant urged that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. 8. This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the par 23797-2026 (O&M) 4 surrendered before the Court. He is in custody since 15.07.2025. The ingredients for commission of offences of cheating and forgery are not at all attracted qua him. His continued detention will not serve any useful purpose. On account of his involvement in other cases, he cannot be de bail. The chances of conclusion of trial in the near future are bleak as only 02 out of 145 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far. It is also argued that his further incarceration is in violation of his rights of personal libert and release on bail as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and it is thus, urged that the petition deserves to be allowed. Per contra, learned Special Public Prosecutor learned Senior counsel for the complainant have v allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature as by hatching a conspiracy, the co-accused and the petitioner prepared forged and fabricated documents and used the same as genuine while making a supplementary trust It is further argued that the petitioner alongwith the co criminally trespassed into the land owned by the complainant damaged the CCTV cameras, had stolen the inverter batteries, LED Screen, wifi router and fan by ousting the security guards out of the boundary of the with intent to grab the land of the complainant urged that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties at considerable length. is in custody since 15.07.2025. The ingredients for commission of offences of cheating and forgery are not at all attracted qua him. His continued detention will not serve any useful purpose. On account of his involvement in other cases, he cannot be denied benefit of bail. The chances of conclusion of trial in the near future are bleak as only 02 out of 145 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far. It is also argued that his further incarceration is in violation of his rights of personal liberty and release on bail as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and it is thus, urged that the petition deserves to be allowed. Special Public Prosecutor for CBI and learned Senior counsel for the complainant have vehemently argued that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature as by hatching a accused and the petitioner prepared forged and fabricated documents and used the same as genuine while making a supplementary trust the petitioner alongwith the co-accused had criminally trespassed into the land owned by the complainant-Trust, had damaged the CCTV cameras, had stolen the inverter batteries, LED Screen, rity guards out of the boundary of the with intent to grab the land of the complainant-Trust. It is thus, urged that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned is in custody since 15.07.2025. The ingredients for commission of offences of cheating and forgery are not at all attracted qua him. His continued detention will not serve any useful purpose. nied benefit of bail. The chances of conclusion of trial in the near future are bleak as only 02 out of 145 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far. It is also argued y and release on bail as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India for CBI and ehemently argued that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature as by hatching a accused and the petitioner prepared forged and fabricated documents and used the same as genuine while making a supplementary trust accused had Trust, had damaged the CCTV cameras, had stolen the inverter batteries, LED Screen, rity guards out of the boundary of the . It is thus, This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned AMIT SHARMA 2026.07.27 16:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-23797 9. The petitioner is alleged to have hatched a conspiracy with the co-accused and in pursuance of that conspiracy, he is alleged to have tried to take forcible possession of the property of the complainant 10.03.2022 by criminally trespassing into the same, damaging the CCTV camera and by throwing out the security guards from the same. Though there was no specific allegation in the FIRs Nos.133 and 303 as against him of hatching any conspiracy to commit offences of ch forged documents, however, him for commission of the aforementioned offences also. From the allegations as levelled against the petitioner commission of 149 is made out produced during trial that any definite conclusion as to his involvement in commission of offences of cheating, forgery or drawn. The petitioner has been in custody for a period of over 01 year. The trial is obviously likely to take time to conclude prosecution witnesses the above discussed facts, this Court is of the considered opinion that further incarceration of the petitioner is not going to serve any fruitful purpose and that is allowed and the petitio furnishing personal as well as surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned 23797-2026 (O&M) 5 The petitioner is alleged to have hatched a conspiracy with the accused and in pursuance of that conspiracy, he is alleged to have tried to take forcible possession of the property of the complainant by criminally trespassing into the same, damaging the CCTV camera and by throwing out the security guards from the same. Though there was no specific allegation in the FIRs Nos.133 and 303 as against him of hatching any conspiracy to commit offences of ch forged documents, however, a composite challan has been present him for commission of the aforementioned offences also. From the allegations as levelled against the petitioner commission of offences punishable under Sections 323, 452, 506, 427, 148, 149 is made out. It is only on thorough assessment of the evidence to be produced during trial that any definite conclusion as to his involvement in commission of offences of cheating, forgery or drawn. The petitioner has been in custody for a period of over 01 year. The trial is obviously likely to take time to conclude prosecution witnesses have been examined so far the above discussed facts, this Court is of the considered opinion that further incarceration of the petitioner is not going to serve any fruitful purpose and that the petition deserves to be allowed. is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing personal as well as surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned The petitioner is alleged to have hatched a conspiracy with the accused and in pursuance of that conspiracy, he is alleged to have tried to take forcible possession of the property of the complainant-Trust on by criminally trespassing into the same, damaging the CCTV camera and by throwing out the security guards from the same. Though there was no specific allegation in the FIRs Nos.133 and 303 as against him of hatching any conspiracy to commit offences of cheating and forgery or use of challan has been presented against him for commission of the aforementioned offences also. From the allegations as levelled against the petitioner prima facie a case for offences punishable under Sections 323, 452, 506, 427, 148, is only on thorough assessment of the evidence to be produced during trial that any definite conclusion as to his involvement in commission of offences of cheating, forgery or use of forged document can be drawn. The petitioner has been in custody for a period of over 01 year. The trial is obviously likely to take time to conclude as only 02 out of 145 been examined so far. Taking into consideration the above discussed facts, this Court is of the considered opinion that the further incarceration of the petitioner is not going to serve any fruitful the petition deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, the same ner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing personal as well as surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned The petitioner is alleged to have hatched a conspiracy with the accused and in pursuance of that conspiracy, he is alleged to have tried to Trust on by criminally trespassing into the same, damaging the CCTV camera and by throwing out the security guards from the same. Though there was no specific allegation in the FIRs Nos.133 and 303 as against him of eating and forgery or use of against him for commission of the aforementioned offences also. From the a case for offences punishable under Sections 323, 452, 506, 427, 148, is only on thorough assessment of the evidence to be produced during trial that any definite conclusion as to his involvement in use of forged document can be drawn. The petitioner has been in custody for a period of over 01 year. The out of 145 n the further incarceration of the petitioner is not going to serve any fruitful same ner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing personal as well as surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned AMIT SHARMA 2026.07.27 16:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-23797 trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned following conditions : 10. In the eventuality of breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the respondent seeking cancellation of the bail. 11. It is made clear that any observation made herein above is only for the purpose o bearing on the merits of the case. 23797-2026 (O&M) 6 trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned following conditions :- (i) The petitioner shall any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case or tamper with the evidence of the case so as to dissuade him from appearing before the Trial Court and shall not tamper with evidence du (ii) The petitioner shall not leave the country under any circumstance without permission of the learned trial Court. (iii) The petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court on each and every date of hearing unless his presence is exempted by a specific order of the Court. (iv) The petitioner shall provide his permanent address as well as present address as well as cellphone No. by way of an affidavit to the Trial Court and shall not change the same during trial. In the eventuality of breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the respondent-State shall be at liberty to move an application seeking cancellation of the bail. It is made clear that any observation made herein above is only for the purpose of deciding the present petition and the same shall have no bearing on the merits of the case. trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned and on the not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case or tamper with the evidence of the case so as to dissuade him from appearing before the Trial Court and shall not tamper with evidence during trial. The petitioner shall not leave the country under any circumstance without permission of the learned trial Court. The petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court on each and every date of hearing unless his presence is exempted by a specific order of the Court. The petitioner shall provide his permanent address as well as present address as well as cellphone No. by way of an affidavit to the Trial Court and shall not change the same In the eventuality of breach of any of the aforementioned State shall be at liberty to move an application It is made clear that any observation made herein above is only f deciding the present petition and the same shall have no and on the not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case or tamper with the evidence of the case so as to dissuade him from appearing before the Trial The petitioner shall not leave the country under any The petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court on each and every date of hearing unless his presence is exempted The petitioner shall provide his permanent address as well as present address as well as cellphone No. by way of an affidavit to the Trial Court and shall not change the same In the eventuality of breach of any of the aforementioned State shall be at liberty to move an application It is made clear that any observation made herein above is only f deciding the present petition and the same shall have no AMIT SHARMA 2026.07.27 16:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-23797 12. Since the main petition has been any, is rendered infructuous. 27.07.2026 Amit Sharma 23797-2026 (O&M) 7 Since the main petition has been any, is rendered infructuous. (MANISHA BATRA) Whether speaking/reasoned:- Whether reportable:- Yes/No Since the main petition has been allowed pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE - Yes/No pending application, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.07.27 16:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.