CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----41764 41764 41764 41764 107 107 107 107 ((((2222nd nd nd nd case) case) case) case) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH Sandeep Goyal State of Haryana Date of Decision: Date of Decision: Date of Decision: Date of Decision: Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: Present: Present: Present: Present:- SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for P.C.) for grant of No.0105 dated Sections 316(2), 318(4) District Ambala. 2. of the State, reads thus: 41764 41764 41764 41764----2026 2026 2026 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----41764 41764 41764 41764----2026 2026 2026 2026 Sandeep Goyal versus Haryana Date of Decision: Date of Decision: Date of Decision: Date of Decision: September 02 September 02 September 02 September 02, , , , 2026 2026 2026 2026 Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: September 02 September 02 September 02 September 02, 2026 , 2026 , 2026 , 2026 HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Mr. Sanjiv Gupta, Senior Advocate Mr. Umesh Sharma, Advocate for the Ms. Mahima Yashpal Singla, Senior DAG Haryana. Mr. Ram Kumar Saini, Advocate for the complainant. ***** ***** ***** ***** SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) Present petition has been filed under Section Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner dated 15.06.2026, registered for the off 316(2), 318(4) and 61 of the BNS, 2023, at Police Station Shahzadpur, District Ambala. The role attributed to the petitioner, as per , reads thus: ““““8. The petitioner-accused is duly named in the FIR. He played an active role in hatching the conspiracy with other accused persons and adduced and allured Gulzar Singh for liquor and asked him to put his thumb 1111 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH 2026 2026 2026 2026 ….Petitioner ….Respondent HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Advocate with for the petitioner. Ms. Mahima Yashpal Singla, Senior DAG Haryana. Ram Kumar Saini, Advocate for the complainant. petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya short ‘BNSS’) (erstwhile Section 438 Cr. bail to the petitioner, in case bearing FIR registered for the offences punishable under and 61 of the BNS, 2023, at Police Station Shahzadpur, The role attributed to the petitioner, as per reply dated 21.08.2026 accused is duly named in the FIR. He played an active role in hatching the conspiracy with other accused persons and adduced r Singh for liquor and asked him to put his thumb 1111 Petitioner ….Respondent Bharatiya Section 438 Cr. in case bearing FIR ences punishable under and 61 of the BNS, 2023, at Police Station Shahzadpur, reply dated 21.08.2026 accused is duly named in the FIR. He played an active role in hatching the conspiracy with other accused persons and adduced r Singh for liquor and asked him to put his thumb MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.09.02 18:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment 2222 CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----41764 41764 41764 41764----2026 2026 2026 2026 impression on a deed as a witness. Thereafter under the guise of getting his signatures as a witness, the petitioner-accused got registered two sale deeds in his name and transferred the land of Gulzar Singh in his name. The petitioner-accused in connivance with other accused persons, got opened an account of Gulzar Singh in DCB Bank and got registered mobile number of other accused in the said account of Gulzar Singh and thereafter first got deposited the amount of sale consideration in the said account. Thereafter, got withdraw the said amount in different dates. xx xx xx”””” 3. Learned senior counsel has submitted that a bare perusal of the FIR would reveal that the allegations leveled against the petitioner are wholly concocted, improbable and devoid of any merits. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question. It has been contended that the sale deed in respect of the land in question was duly executed in favour of the petitioner and the entire sale consideration was paid. Learned senior counsel has further submitted that, on the basis of the aforesaid sale deed, mutation was also duly sanctioned in favour of the petitioner. It has further been submitted that an application for partition has also been preferred before the competent authority, which is pending adjudication. Learned senior counsel has also pointed out that the petitioner has instituted Civil Suit No.109 of 2026 seeking a decree of permanent injunction against the defendants therein. According to learned senior counsel, even assuming that there was any discrepancy or deficiency in the sale consideration, the complainant-side could have availed the appropriate remedy; however, no civil suit has been instituted at the end of the complainant to the effect that the sale deed in question is bad. Learned senior counsel has, thus, contended that, in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, no offence of cheating, whatsoever, is made out against the petitioner. Learned senior counsel has urged that as the price of the land in question has been MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.09.02 18:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment 3333 CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----41764 41764 41764 41764----2026 2026 2026 2026 increased, therefore, the entire controversy/mischief is being created against the petitioner. 3.1. Learned senior counsel has argued that nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner. Learned senior counsel has further iterated that the petitioner is ready and willing to join investigation. It has been urged that no useful purpose would be served by sending the petitioner behind bars. On the basis of the aforementioned submissions, grant of the instant petition is prayed for. 4. Learned State counsel has filed reply by way of an affidavit dated 21.08.2026, which is already on record. Raising submissions in tandem with the said reply, learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner by arguing that allegations raised against the petitioner are serious in nature. It has been argued that the petitioner fraudulently got two sale deeds registered in his name and transferred the land of the complainant’s father (who is an illiterate person) in his name. Learned State counsel has also submitted that the petitioner does not bear clean antecedents and there are other FIR(s) registered against him. It has been further argued that investigation, in the present case, is still under way and the petitioner is yet to be arrested. Given these circumstances, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is indispensable. It has been contended that, in case, the petitioner is accorded concession of anticipatory bail, there is all likelihood that he may abscond from the process of justice as also influence/ intimidate the prosecution witnesses. Thus, the present petition is devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed. MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.09.02 18:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment 4444 CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----41764 41764 41764 41764----2026 2026 2026 2026 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the rival parties and have gone through the available record of the case. 6. As per the prosecution case, serious allegations have been levelled against the petitioner. A perusal of the prosecution case as well as the material available on record prima facie reveals that the petitioner got registered two sale deeds and transferred the land belonging to the father of the complainant (Gulzar Singh) in his name. Perusal of the reply filed by the State further, prima facie, shows that the petitioner in connivance with other accused persons got opened an account in the name of Gulzar Singh and got registered mobile number of some other accused in the said account. It is further, prima facie, borne out that the accused persons got deposited the amount of the sale consideration in the aforesaid account and, thereafter, withdrew the said amount on different occasions. The nature of allegations does not persuade this Court to extend the extraordinary concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6.1. That apart, the petitioner is stated to be involved in other FIR(s). The said criminal antecedents reveal that the petitioner is a habitual offender with a tendency to indulge in criminal activities. The criminal antecedents of the petitioner also raise a reasonable apprehension that, if enlarged on bail, he may indulge in similar criminal activities, misuse the concession of bail, or interfere with the fair course of justice. The possibility of his absconding or influencing prosecution witnesses also cannot be ruled out, particularly in view of his repeated involvement in criminal cases. MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.09.02 18:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment 5555 CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----41764 41764 41764 41764----2026 2026 2026 2026 6.2. No cause nay plausible cause has been shown, at this stage, from which it can be deciphered that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the present FIR. 7. It is befitting to mention here that while considering plea for grant of anticipatory bail, the Court has to equilibrate between safeguarding individual rights and protecting societal interest(s). The Court ought to reckon with the magnitude and nature of the offence; the role attributed to the accused; the need for fair and free investigation as also the deeper and wider impact of such alleged iniquities on the society. It is imperative that every person in the society can expect an atmosphere free from foreboding & fear of any transgression. At this stage, there is no material on record to hold that prima facie case is not made out against the petitioner. The material which has come on record and preliminary investigation appear to establish reasonable basis for the accusations. Thus, it is not appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, as it would necessarily cause impediment in effective investigation. A profitable reference in this regard is being made to the dicta passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court titled as State State State State v. Anil Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 : v. Anil Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 : v. Anil Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 : v. Anil Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 : 1997 SCC (Cri) 1039 1997 SCC (Cri) 1039 1997 SCC (Cri) 1039 1997 SCC (Cri) 1039, the Supreme Court held as under, relevant whereof reads as under: ““““6. We find force in the submission of CBI that custodial interrogation is qualitatively more elicitation-oriented than questioning a suspect who is well- ensconced with a favourable order under Section 438 of the Code. In a case like this, effective interrogation of a suspected person is of tremendous advantage in disinterring many useful informations and also materials which would have been concealed. Success in such interrogation would elude if the suspected person knows that he is well protected and insulated by a pre-arrest bail order during the time he is interrogated. Very often interrogation in such a condition would reduce to a mere ritual. The argument that the custodial interrogation is fraught with the danger of the person being subjected to third-degree methods need not be countenanced, for, such an argument can be advanced by all accused in all criminal cases. The Court has to presume that responsible police officers would MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.09.02 18:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment 6666 CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----41764 41764 41764 41764----2026 2026 2026 2026 conduct themselves in a responsible manner and that those entrusted with the task of disinterring offences would not conduct themselves as offenders.”””” 8. At this stage, there is no material on record to hold that prima facie case is not made out against the petitioner. The material which has come on record, preliminary investigation, serious allegations and the petitioner having no clean antecedents, appear to establish a reasonable basis for his accusation. Accordingly, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner does not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail in the factual milieu of the case in hand. Moreover, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary for an effective investigation & to unravel the truth. The petition is, thus, devoid of merits and is hereby dismissed dismissed dismissed dismissed. 9. Nothing said hereinabove shall be deemed to be an expression of opinion upon merits of the case/investigation. 10. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off. ((((SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL)))) JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE September 02 September 02 September 02 September 02, 2026 , 2026 , 2026 , 2026 mahavir Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.09.02 18:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment