CRM-M-5757 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT (204) DEV HANDA STATE OF PUNJAB & ANOTHER CORAM: Present: ALOK JAIN, J. (Oral) 1. anticipatory bail granted to respondent No. 2 vide order dated 04.07.2025 in FIR No. 03 dated 29.01.2025, under Section 498 Station NRI, District Police Commissionerate, Jalandhar. 2. affidavit of Mr. Rashminder Singh, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub-Division NRI, Jalandhar taken on record. 3. obligations, as agreed between the parties in the settlement, have not been materialized which was in joint ownership of the petitioner and respondent No. 2, is to be transferr -1- 5757-2026 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH DEV HANDA Versus STATE OF PUNJAB & ANOTHER HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK JAIN **** Mr. J.S. Lalli, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amandeep Singh Samra, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Amit Dhawan, Advocate for respondent No.2. **** ALOK JAIN, J. (Oral) The present petition has been filed seeking cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to respondent No. 2 vide order dated 04.07.2025 in FIR No. 03 dated 29.01.2025, under Section 498 Station NRI, District Police Commissionerate, Jalandhar. Learned State counsel has filed a short reply by way of an affidavit of Mr. Rashminder Singh, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Division NRI, Jalandhar-1, on behalf of the respondent taken on record. Learned counsel for the petitioner submit obligations, as agreed between the parties in the settlement, have not been materialized. It is submitted that as per the settlement, a house in the USA, which was in joint ownership of the petitioner and respondent No. 2, is to be transferred in the name of the petitioner. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-5757-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision:- 01.04.2026 ……Petitioner ……Respondents ALOK JAIN Mr. J.S. Lalli, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amandeep Singh Samra, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Amit Dhawan, Advocate for respondent No.2. been filed seeking cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to respondent No. 2 vide order dated 04.07.2025 in FIR No. 03 dated 29.01.2025, under Section 498-A of the IPC at Police Station NRI, District Police Commissionerate, Jalandhar. counsel has filed a short reply by way of an affidavit of Mr. Rashminder Singh, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, 1, on behalf of the respondent-State, which is Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that certain obligations, as agreed between the parties in the settlement, have not been . It is submitted that as per the settlement, a house in the USA, which was in joint ownership of the petitioner and respondent No. 2, is to ed in the name of the petitioner. Since the said house was 01.04.2026 ……Petitioner ……Respondents been filed seeking cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to respondent No. 2 vide order dated 04.07.2025 in A of the IPC at Police counsel has filed a short reply by way of an affidavit of Mr. Rashminder Singh, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, State, which is s that certain obligations, as agreed between the parties in the settlement, have not been . It is submitted that as per the settlement, a house in the USA, which was in joint ownership of the petitioner and respondent No. 2, is to was MANJU 2026.04.06 13:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-5757 mortgaged, in the name of petitioner, but no efforts have been made in this regard 4. petitioner’s daughter since she was unable to demonstrate her source of income to discharge liability and repay the mortgage, the same was not approved. It is further submitted that respondent No. 2 is, in fact, being supported by her father and is in a position to discharge the same. 5. 6. amendment/modification in the terms of the agreement so as t executable in its true tenor and spirit, the of the terms of agreement respondent No. 2 bail. 7. submits that a that he be permitted to raise all issues in the said proceedings. 8. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to raise all his concerns before the Court of competent jurisdiction in the quashing petition. 9. April 01, 2026 manju Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether Reportable: -2- 5757-2026 (O&M) , the respondent has to do the needful to get the same transferred in the name of petitioner, but no efforts have been made in this regard Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly su petitioner’s daughter had applied for transfer of the mortgage as well, but since she was unable to demonstrate her source of income to discharge liability and repay the mortgage, the same was not approved. It is further d that respondent No. 2 is, in fact, being supported by her father and is in a position to discharge the same. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Keeping the issue open with regard /modification in the terms of the agreement so as t executable in its true tenor and spirit, the mere of the terms of agreement cannot be a ground to cancel the bail granted to respondent No. 2 without demonstrating any violation of the condition of Faced with the above, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a petition for quashing the present FIR that he be permitted to raise all issues in the said proceedings. In light of the above, the present petition is dismissed. er, liberty is granted to the petitioner to raise all his concerns before the Court of competent jurisdiction in the quashing petition. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. 2026 Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether Reportable:- Yes/No has to do the needful to get the same transferred in the name of petitioner, but no efforts have been made in this regard. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submitted that, in fact, had applied for transfer of the mortgage as well, but since she was unable to demonstrate her source of income to discharge the liability and repay the mortgage, the same was not approved. It is further d that respondent No. 2 is, in fact, being supported by her father Heard learned counsel for the parties. Keeping the issue open with regard to /modification in the terms of the agreement so as to make it mere allegation of non-fulfillment cannot be a ground to cancel the bail granted to without demonstrating any violation of the condition of th the above, learned counsel for the petitioner for quashing the present FIR is pending and prays that he be permitted to raise all issues in the said proceedings. In light of the above, the present petition is dismissed. er, liberty is granted to the petitioner to raise all his concerns before the Court of competent jurisdiction in the quashing petition. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (ALOK JAIN) JUDGE has to do the needful to get the same transferred bmitted that, in fact, had applied for transfer of the mortgage as well, but the liability and repay the mortgage, the same was not approved. It is further d that respondent No. 2 is, in fact, being supported by her father to o make it fulfillment cannot be a ground to cancel the bail granted to without demonstrating any violation of the condition of th the above, learned counsel for the petitioner is pending and prays In light of the above, the present petition is dismissed. er, liberty is granted to the petitioner to raise all his concerns before MANJU 2026.04.06 13:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document