IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 109 CRM-M-22078-2025 Date of decision: April 28, 2025 NARINDER SINGH .....Petitioner Versus STATE OF PUNJAB .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL Present: Mr. Satnam Singh Gill, Advocate for the petitioner. MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. 1. The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.151 dated 15.07.2024 under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120B of IPC, 1860, registered at Police Station City Sangrur, District Sangrur. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case at a highly belated stage. It is submitted that the petitioner has no connection whatsoever with one Jodha Singh, who is alleged to have bene impersonated in the execution of a forged sale deed. It is further argued that the petitioner is neither an executant nor a beneficiary of the alleged forged document and is being made a scapegoat at the behest of Sarpanch of his village due to ulterior motives. Learned counsel asserts that nothing incriminating is to be recovered at the instance of the petitioner, and hence, custodial interrogation of the petitioner would not be warranted. 3. Notice of motion. Jaspreet Kaur 2025.04.30 17:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-22078-2025 -2- 4. On the asking of the Court, Mr. H.S. Deol, Sr. DAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. 5. Learned State Counsel has vehemently opposed the prayer and submissions made by the counsel opposite. Learned State counsel, on instructions, has submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are serious and grave in nature. It has been argued, on instructions, that the petitioner actively participated in the commission of the offence by impersonating one Jodha Singh, who had passed away 26 years ago, in a forged and fabricated sale deed, which was subsequently executed. Learned State counsel has further emphasized that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is essential to unearth the modus operandi adopted in the preparation and execution of the forged documents and to identify the broader conspiracy, if any. It has also been submitted by the learned State counsel, on instructions, that the petitioner has criminal antecedents as he had previously been involved in criminal cases, which further militates against the grant of extraordinary concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6. Upon careful consideration of the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and learned State counsel, and upon perusal of the material available on record, this Court is of the considered view that no case is made out for grant of extraordinary concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 7. The allegations levelled against the petitioner are not only grave but also reveal that the petitioner impersonated a deceased person-who is Jaspreet Kaur 2025.04.30 17:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-22078-2025 -3- stated to have died about 2 decades ago-in the course of executing a forged and fabricated sale deed. The act of impersonating a deceased person, and thereby lending false appearance of legality to a document intended to effect proprietary rights, prima facie suggests a calculated and premeditated conspiracy to defraud. 8. This Court concurs with the prayer made by the learned State counsel for dismissal of the instant petition as the custodial interrogation of the petitioner would be essential to unearth the full extent of the conspiracy, including the role of other co-conspirators and the method by which forged documents were procured and executed. 9. In the facts and circumstances as enumerated hereinabove, and the allegations levelled against the petitioner, no ground is made to extend the extraordinary concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 10. Accordingly, the instant petition stands dismissed. 11. However, it is made clear that anything observed hereinabove shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. April 28, 2025 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Jaspreet Kaur JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No Jaspreet Kaur 2025.04.30 17:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh