211. IN THE Ajmer Singh State of Punjab CORAM: Present: MANJARI NEHRU KAUL 1. is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.1 12.04.2022, under Sections registered at Police Station Amritsar. 2. FIR in question came to be registered way back on 12.04.2022, it was only as recent as on 02.03.2025 that the petitioner was arrested in the instant case and that too only for allegedl attempted to impersonate the complainant; the complainant IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM Date of decision: Ajmer Singh Versus State of Punjab HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL Mr. Nikhil Ghai, Advocate, and Mr. Akhil Godara, Advocate, Ms. Malini Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Shiva Khurmi, AAG, Punjab ----- MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL) Prayer in this petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.1 , under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120 registered at Police Station Civil Lines, District Police Commissionerate Learned counsel for the petitioner FIR in question came to be registered way back on 12.04.2022, it was only as recent as on 02.03.2025 that the petitioner was arrested in the instant case and that too only for allegedly conspiring with the co attempted to impersonate the complainant; the the complainant was allegedly made in favour of co HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-25213-2025 Date of decision: 18.07.2025 .... Petitioner .... Respondent HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL and for the petitioner. Mr. Shiva Khurmi, AAG, Punjab, with ASI Balwinder Singh. under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.101, dated 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of IPC, Civil Lines, District Police Commissionerate Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that although the FIR in question came to be registered way back on 12.04.2022, it was only as recent as on 02.03.2025 that the petitioner was arrested in the instant y conspiring with the co-accused, who the forged Power of Attorney of was allegedly made in favour of co-accused, Kishore under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, 1, dated , Civil Lines, District Police Commissionerate although the FIR in question came to be registered way back on 12.04.2022, it was only as recent as on 02.03.2025 that the petitioner was arrested in the instant accused, who forged Power of Attorney of SANJEEV KUMAR 2025.07.18 16:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-25213-2025 - 2 - Kumar and thereafter, all the accused attempted to sell off the property of the complainant to one Parveen Singh. Learned counsel has asserted that the petitioner is even, as per the case of the prosecution, neither a signatory nor purchaser or seller of the property in question. It has been further submitted that the petitioner is being sought to be arraigned as an accused only with the aid of Section 120-B IPC. It has been further submitted that since the investigation qua the petitioner is complete and challan also stands presented, his further incarceration would serve no useful purpose as the possibility of trial concluding in the near future looks remote with as many as 18 witnesses having been cited by the prosecution. 3. Per contra, learned State counsel, while opposing the prayer and submissions made by the counsel opposite, has not disputed the custody period of the petitioner nor has he disputed that the investigation qua him is complete. It has also not been disputed that the petitioner is neither a signatory to the agreement of sell nor purchaser or seller of the property of the complainant. However, it has been asserted that the petitioner along with all the accused had conspired to cheat the complainant on the basis of a fabricated and forged document. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material placed on record. 5. In a magisterial trial, the petitioner has now been in custody since 02.03.2025. The entire case against the petitioner is based on SANJEEV KUMAR 2025.07.18 16:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-25213-2025 - 3 - documentary evidence which is already part of the challan. The petitioner is only alleged to be a conspirator to the crime in question. 6. In the facts and circumstances as enumerated hereinabove, this Court deems it fit to extend the concession of bail to the petitioner. 7. Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed and the petitioner be admitted to bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. 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. 8. Needless to add, in case the petitioner misuses the concession of bail granted to him, the State would be at liberty to seek cancellation of the same. (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) JUDGE July 18, 2025 sanjeev Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No SANJEEV KUMAR 2025.07.18 16:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document