CRM-M-71072 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT 107 PRITPAL STATE OF CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Present : SURYA P 2. ‘Narinder Singh Lochab only. It was Singh, was 71072-2025 (O&M) 8587 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH CRM DATE OF DECISION PRITPAL SINGH @DALI VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA P Mr. Lakhwinder S. Sidhu, Advocate Mr. I.P.S. Sabharwal, DAG, Punjab Mr. Arun Batra, Advocate for the complainant. SURYA PARTAP SINGH, J. The abovementioned FIR came into being at the instance of Narinder Singh Lochab’, hereinafter being referred to as ‘com only. It was stated by the complainant that was living in Kenya, and that in July 1974 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-71072-2025 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION : 27.02.2026 .....PETITIONER VERSUS .....RESPONDENT SURYA PARTAP SINGH , Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. I.P.S. Sabharwal, DAG, Punjab. Mr. Arun Batra, Advocate for the complainant. FIR came into being at the instance of being referred to as ‘complainant’ that he along with his brother, Avtar , and that in July 1974, they had jointly purchased .2026 .....PETITIONER .....RESPONDENT FIR came into being at the instance of plainant’ Avtar purchased GAURAV THAKUR 2026.02.28 15:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-71072 22 acres of land SAS Nagar 3. that his brother Avtar Singh died in Kenya in the year 1976 and he (complainant) is still alive, but some forged a Will of Avtar Singh in death certificate thereby claimed ownership over the share of Avtar Singh on the basis of abovementioned 4. share also, had executed a Power of Attorney property. 5. information up. According to prosecution, during the course of investigation it has transpired that there are two Wills Singh, and 6. 7. the petitioner case, and that no fraud or forgery, whatsoever, has taken place, and petitioner 71072-2025 (O&M) 8587 22 acres of land, in equal shares at Village Ka SAS Nagar (Mohali). The pith and substance of the allegations of the complainant are that his brother Avtar Singh died in Kenya in the year 1976 and he (complainant) is still alive, but some land grabbers including the petitioner Will of Avtar Singh in the year 2019 death certificate of Avtar Singh, showing his death, thereby claimed ownership over the share of Avtar Singh on the basis of abovementioned Will. It has also been alleged by the complainant that qua his own share also, the claim has been launched by projecting that the complainant had executed a Power of Attorney for the sale of his abovementioned property. It is the case of the prosecution tha information, formal FIR of this case was lodged and the investigation taken According to prosecution, during the course of investigation it has transpired that there are two Wills, alleged to have and that in one of the Will, the petitioner is Heard. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent, who has been falsely implicated in the present case, and that no fraud or forgery, whatsoever, has taken place, and petitioner is being harassed without any fault on his part. It has also been 2 at Village Kaimbala, Tehsil and District pith and substance of the allegations of the complainant are that his brother Avtar Singh died in Kenya in the year 1976 and he land grabbers including the petitioner the year 2019 and thereafter, created a fake , showing his death, in the year 2020 and thereby claimed ownership over the share of Avtar Singh on the basis of It has also been alleged by the complainant that qua his own launched by projecting that the complainant for the sale of his abovementioned It is the case of the prosecution that in view of abovementioned , formal FIR of this case was lodged and the investigation taken According to prosecution, during the course of investigation it has alleged to have been executed by Avtar in one of the Will, the petitioner is a beneficiary. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that is innocent, who has been falsely implicated in the present case, and that no fraud or forgery, whatsoever, has taken place, and that the without any fault on his part. It has also been mbala, Tehsil and District pith and substance of the allegations of the complainant are that his brother Avtar Singh died in Kenya in the year 1976 and he land grabbers including the petitioner created a fake in the year 2020 and thereby claimed ownership over the share of Avtar Singh on the basis of It has also been alleged by the complainant that qua his own launched by projecting that the complainant for the sale of his abovementioned in view of abovementioned , formal FIR of this case was lodged and the investigation taken According to prosecution, during the course of investigation it has been executed by Avtar It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that is innocent, who has been falsely implicated in the present that the without any fault on his part. It has also been GAURAV THAKUR 2026.02.28 15:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-71072 contended by learned counsel for the peti aspects to be noted in the present case is that on completion of investigation, challan has already been filed in the Court challan is and not against the petitioner. It has also for the petitioner of document has to be looked into, ground the petitioner cannot be 8. the complainant been contended by case, in order to illegally usurp the property of two brothers, who are residing in Kenya, false and forged documents have been prepared including the Will of Avtar Singh and his death certificate showing his death in the year 2020 Singh had died way back in the year 1976 Avtar Singh, who died in Kenya Investigating Agency. It the complainant that document, 9. 10. settled principles of law that the Court must be circumspect while exercising power for grant of anticipatory bail and it should not be granted as a matter 71072-2025 (O&M) 8587 contended by learned counsel for the peti aspects to be noted in the present case is that on completion of investigation, has already been filed in the Court is against two persons only, namely Iqbal and not against the petitioner. It has also petitioner that with regard to title of the property, wherein the validity of document has to be looked into, is already pending and thus, on similar the petitioner cannot be prosecuted. The learned State Counsel being assisted by learned counsel for the complainant has controverted the abovementioned arguments. been contended by learned counsel for the complainant that in the present e, in order to illegally usurp the property of two brothers, who are residing in Kenya, false and forged documents have been prepared including the Will of Avtar Singh and his death certificate showing his death in the year 2020. As per learned counsel for the complainant, Singh had died way back in the year 1976 Avtar Singh, who died in Kenya, has already been supplied Investigating Agency. It has been further the complainant that the petitioner being document, is not entitled for the benefit of 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 while exercising power for grant of anticipatory bail and it should not be granted as a matter 3 contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that one of the important aspects to be noted in the present case is that on completion of investigation, has already been filed in the Court, and that the abovementioned , namely Iqbal Singh and Pargat Sin and not against the petitioner. It has also been contended by learned counsel title of the property, wherein the validity already pending and thus, on similar prosecuted. being assisted by learned counsel for has controverted the abovementioned arguments. It has learned counsel for the complainant that in the present e, in order to illegally usurp the property of two brothers, who are residing in Kenya, false and forged documents have been prepared including the Will of Avtar Singh and his death certificate showing his death . As per learned counsel for the complainant, in fact Avtar Singh had died way back in the year 1976, and that the death certificate of , has already been supplied to the further contended by learned counsel for the petitioner being a beneficiary of the forged for the benefit of 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 while exercising power for grant of anticipatory bail and it should not be granted as a matter portant aspects to be noted in the present case is that on completion of investigation, , and that the abovementioned Pargat Singh, been contended by learned counsel title of the property, wherein the validity already pending and thus, on similar being assisted by learned counsel for It has learned counsel for the complainant that in the present e, in order to illegally usurp the property of two brothers, who are residing in Kenya, false and forged documents have been prepared, including the Will of Avtar Singh and his death certificate showing his death Avtar death certificate of to the learned counsel for of the forged 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 as a matter GAURAV THAKUR 2026.02.28 15:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-71072 of rule. Rather as per law the aboves the Court is convinced that exceptional circumstances exist for the extraordinary remedy. 11. India in the case of Srikant Upadhyay v. State of Bihar 2024 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 held that bail is a rule, it cannot; by any stretch of imagination, be said that anticipatory bail is a rule. 12. 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 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. 13. 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 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. 71072-2025 (O&M) 8587 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 India in the case of Srikant Upadhyay v. State of Bihar 2024 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 held that bail is a rule, it cannot; by any stretch of imagination, be said that atory 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 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 justice 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 Supreme Court of India has held that anticipatory bail 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. 4 aid benefit should be granted only when the Court is convinced that exceptional circumstances exist for the 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 held that bail is a rule, it cannot; by any 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. 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. , 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 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 accused of grave offence. aid benefit should be granted only when the Court is convinced that exceptional circumstances exist for the , the Hon'ble Supreme Court of 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 held that bail is a rule, it cannot; by any 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. 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 , 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 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 GAURAV THAKUR 2026.02.28 15:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-71072 14. 1980 SCC (2) 565, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India held that: 15. categorical allegations in the present case qua the fact that death of Avtar Singh, whose Will is being set the year certificate the death of Avtar Singh regard to Will dated 19.12.2019 that this Will is a forged document. 16. the only document qua which there is a question mark with regard to genuineness. 71072-2025 (O&M) 8587 In the case of Gurbaksh Singh Sibb 1980 SCC (2) 565, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India held that: (i) The power under Section 438, Criminal an extraordinary character and must be exercised sparingly in 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. (iii) 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 43 exercised. A perusal of record shows that categorical allegations in the present case qua the fact that death of Avtar whose Will is being set-up by the petitioner 1976, whereas the Will is dated certificate the death of Avtar Singh had taken place in the year 1976, with to Will dated 19.12.2019, and only inference that this Will is a forged document. In the present case, another relevant aspect only document qua which there is a question mark with regard to genuineness. Rather there are allegations of forgery of Power of Attorney of 5 baksh 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 ordinary 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. Where a legitimate case for the remand of the offender to the nder 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 there are very specific and categorical allegations in the present case qua the fact that death of Avtar up by the petitioner in his own favour, died in dated 19.12.2019. Once as per death had taken place in the year 1976, with only inference, which can be drawn another relevant aspect is that Will is only document qua which there is a question mark with regard to Rather there are allegations of forgery of Power of Attorney of a etc. v. State of Punjab Procedure Code, is of ordinary 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 Where a legitimate case for the remand of the offender to the nder 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 8 should not be there are very specific and categorical allegations in the present case qua the fact that death of Avtar in his own favour, died in death had taken place in the year 1976, with , which can be drawn, is is that Will is not only document qua which there is a question mark with regard to its Rather there are allegations of forgery of Power of Attorney of GAURAV THAKUR 2026.02.28 15:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-71072 complainant also, who is now being proje forgery of death certificate of Avtar Singh showing his death in the year 2020. 17. against the petitioner, Investigating Agency and the prominent role attributed to the petitioner being beneficiary of Will, it is hereby unearth the entire racket involved in the opportunity it may adversely affect the outcome of investigation. 18. custodial interrogation of Investiga present case, if such right is den result into miscarriage of justice, as the investigation headway. and the rol arrest bail. 19. above-discussed circumstances exist in this case, which may call for the discretion is hereby held dismissal. Accordingly, the same i 71072-2025 (O&M) 8587 complainant also, who is now being proje forgery of death certificate of Avtar Singh showing his death in the year Taking into consideration the seriousness of the allegations against the petitioner, the clinching evidence, which is being Investigating Agency and the prominent role attributed to the petitioner being beneficiary of Will, it is hereby held that the entire racket involved in the opportunity of custodial interrogation is denied to the Investigating Agency, it may adversely affect the outcome of investigation. It shall not be out of place to mention here that right of custodial interrogation of Investigating Agency is a valuable right present case, if such right is denied to the Investigating Agency result into miscarriage of justice, as the investigation Accordingly, it is hereby held that in view of gravity of offence, and the role attributed to him, the petitioner is not entitled for benefit of bail. 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 of this Court for grant of anticipatory bail. is hereby held that the present petition . Accordingly, the same is hereby 6 complainant also, who is now being projected as dead, and there is also forgery of death certificate of Avtar Singh showing his death in the year Taking into consideration the seriousness of the allegations evidence, which is being collected by the Investigating Agency and the prominent role attributed to the petitioner held that in the instant case in order to the entire racket involved in the creation of fake documents, of custodial interrogation is denied to the Investigating Agency, it may adversely affect the outcome of investigation. It shall not be out of place to mention here that right of ting Agency is a valuable right and in the ied to the Investigating Agency it is likely to result into miscarriage of justice, as the investigation may not take a proper Accordingly, it is hereby held that in view of gravity of offence, the petitioner is not entitled for benefit of pre 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 for grant of anticipatory bail. Thus petition is devoid of merits deserve hereby dismissed. as dead, and there is also the forgery of death certificate of Avtar Singh showing his death in the year Taking into consideration the seriousness of the allegations collected by the Investigating Agency and the prominent role attributed to the petitioner in order to creation of fake documents, if of custodial interrogation is denied to the Investigating Agency, It shall not be out of place to mention here that right of in the it is likely to may not take a proper Accordingly, it is hereby held that in view of gravity of offence, pre- is analyzed in the light of no such exceptional exercise of Thus, it deserves GAURAV THAKUR 2026.02.28 15:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-71072 20. shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 21. application Gaurav Thakur Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable 71072-2025 (O&M) 8587 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 applications, if any, are rendered infructuous. Whether speaking/reasoned :Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No 7 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 endered infructuous. :Yes/No : Yes/No 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 2026.02.28 15:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document