CRM-M- 7778 IN THE (207) KULWINDER STATE OF PU CORAM: HO Present: Mr Mr Mr Ms Mr Mr *** MANISHA BA 1. Th Section 482 of for grant of 17.10.2024 reg Station Sohana, 2. Th complaint subm and a sheller o purchase some l of Rs.1,50,00,00 Singh. As per been given by 7778-2026 (O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB CHANDIGARH CR Da DER SINGH AND ANOTHER Versus PUNJAB HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MAN Mr. P.S. Ahluwalia, Senior Advoca Mr. Depinder Singh Virk, Advocat Mr. Sidhant Thukral, Advocate for Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab Mr. G.S. Dhot, Advocate and Mr. G.S. Ghuman, Advocate for th **** A BATRA, J. (ORAL) The instant petition has been fi of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha San of anticipatory bail in case arisin 4 registered under Sections 406, 42 ohana, District SAS Nagar. The aforementioned FIR was regis t submitted by complainant– Jai Parta eller owner, alleging that he had e some land situated at village Kurri wit 0,00,000/-. Sunil Giri was GPA holder s per the terms of agreement, an am en by him to accused Sunil Giri. H JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH CRM-M-7778-2026 (O&M) Date of decision : 18.08.2026 ... Petitioners ...Respondent MANISHA BATRA dvocate with dvocate and ate for the petitioners njab for the complainant een filed by the petitioners under Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) arising out of FIR No.295 dated 6, 420 and 120B of IPC at Police s registered on the basis of a written i Partap Singh, a commission agent had entered into an agreement to rri with accused Sunil Giri for a sum holder of the original owner Balwant an amount of Rs.1,30,00,000/- had iri. However, he kept on avoiding s nder SS”) ated olice ritten gent nt to sum want had iding AMIT SHARMA 2026.08.19 10:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M- 7778 execution of sa Balwant Singh Sunil Giri had g Sunil Giri, can aforementioned Balwant Singh secured a stay o had subsequentl 3. Aft initiated. Durin statement allegi petitioners, who Kaur had usur Attorney dated Apprehending t anticipatory bai Sessions Judge, 4. It i have been falsel were nominated by the complai nor they were b of offences of them. Even oth 7778-2026 (O&M) 2 of sale deed in his name. Subsequ Singh in connivance with his sons i. i had got the Power of Attorney dated ri, cancelled on 30.03.2021 with an tioned amount to the complainant. H Singh had also filed a civil suit with re stay order and then sold the same lan quently transferred the same in the fav After registration of FIR, inv During investigation, the complainan alleging that accused Balwant Singh who are his sons, Sukhwinder Singh usurped his money and had canc dated 04.08.2020. The petitioners ding their arrest, they jointly moved ry bail, which was dismissed by the Judge, S.A.S. Nagar, vide order dated It is argued by learned Senior coun falsely implicated in this case. They w inated as accused on the basis of supp mplainant. They were neither parties were beneficiary of any transaction. T es of cheating and criminal breach en otherwise, both these offences are bsequently, he came to know that ons i.e. the petitioners and accused dated 04.08.2020 issued in favour of ith an intent to cause loss of the ant. He also came to know that the with regard to the same land and had me land to his son Sukhwinder, who the favour of one Ravinder Kaur. , investigation proceedings were plainant recorded his supplementary Singh in connivance with the present r Singh, Sarabjit Singh and Ravinder d cancelled the General Power of oners were nominated as accused. moved an application for grant of by the Court of learned Additional dated 31.01.2026. counsel for the petitioners that they They were not named in the FIR and of supplementary statement recorded parties to the agreement in question ion. The ingredients for commission reach of trust are not attracted qua s are anti-thesis to each other. They that used ur of f the t the had who were ntary esent inder r of used. nt of ional they and rded stion ssion qua They AMIT SHARMA 2026.08.19 10:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M- 7778 are ready to joi No recovery is deserve to be ex 5. Pe the complainan serious in natu proper investiga does not deserv 6. Th counsel for the p 7. Th Balwant Singh agreement to s power of attorn only on the bas that they were n Their nominatio the accused Ba nature of the circumstances p that custodial in proposition of l conviction sente As such a case 7778-2026 (O&M) 3 to join investigation. Their custodial ery is to be effected from them. It i o be extended benefit of pre-arrest bail Per contra, learned State counsel, lainant, has argued that the allegatio n nature. Their custodial interrogatio vestigation in the matter. It is, theref deserve to be allowed. This Court has heard the rival s or the parties at considerable length. The petitioners are alleged to have Singh and Sunil Giri in inducing the t to sell property owned by accused attorney, Sunil Giri. They were not the basis of supplementary statement were nominated as accused. They are n ination as accused is on the ground ed Balwant Singh and Sunil Giri. T f the allegations as leveled again nces peculiar to this case, this Court dial interrogation of the petitioners is n of law that pre-trial incarceration sh n sentencing and that bail should be t a case for grant of anticipatory bail stodial interrogation is not required. m. It is, therefore, argued that they st bail. unsel, assisted by learned counsel for legations against the petitioners are rogation is required for conducting therefore, stressed that the petition rival submissions made by learned o have connived with the co-accused ng the complainant to enter into an ccused Balwant Singh through his re not named in the FIR and it was ement recorded by the complainant y are not signatory to any document. round of hatching a conspiracy with Giri. Taking into consideration the against the petitioners and the Court is of the considered opinion ners is not required. It is well-settled tion should not be a replica of post- ld be the rule and not an exception. y bail is made out in favour of the ired. they l for s are cting tition rned used to an his was inant ent. with the the inion ttled - n. f the AMIT SHARMA 2026.08.19 10:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M- 7778 petitioners. A ordered to be e investigation an receipt of a ce released on bail surety bonds to 8. It i not be construed case and shall n 9. Sin any, is rendered 18.08.2026 Amit Sharma 7778-2026 (O&M) 4 Accordingly, the petition is allo o be extended benefit of anticipatory tion and surrendering within a period f a certified copy of this order and n bail by the Investigating Officer on nds to his satisfaction. It is, however, clarified that the o nstrued as an expression of opinion of shall not influence the outcome of the t Since the main petition has been ndered infructuous. (M Whether speaking/reasoned:- Whether reportable:- Yes/No is allowed and the petitioners are ipatory bail, subject to their joining period of 10 days from the date of r and upon doing so, they shall be cer on furnishing personal as well as t the observations made above shall ion of this Court on the merits of the of the trial in any manner. allowed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE - Yes/No are ining te of ll be ell as shall f the n, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.08.19 10:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.