CRM-M-33593-2026 (O&M) -:1:- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (102) CRM-M-33593-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision:14.07.2026 RAM SINGH … Petitioner Versus STATE OF PUNJAB ... Respondent -.- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL Present:- Mr. J.K. Singla, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Jasjit Singh Rattu, DAG, Punjab. Mr. P.S. Jammu, Advocate for the complainant. -.- VIRINDER AGGARWAL , J . (Oral) CRM-27811-2026 1. Application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) seeking impleadment of the applicant as respondent No. 2 in the present petition. 2. Having considered the averments made in the application and for the reasons stated therein, the present application is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The applicant is ordered to be impleaded as respondent No. 2 in the array of parties. The amended memo of parties, if not already filed, shall be taken on record during the course of the day. CRM-27812-2026 GAURAV SOROT 2026.07.14 17:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-33593-2026 (O&M) -:2:- 3. Application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) seeking permission to place on record a short reply by way of affidavit along with the annexures appended thereto. 4. In view of the averments made in the application and for the reasons stated therein, the application is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The short reply, along with the affidavit and the annexures appended therewith, is ordered to be taken on record. Main Case 5. First petition under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) seeking the concession of anticipatory bail in FIR No. 56 dated 04.04.2026, registered under Sections 108 and 56 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Sections 306 and 116 IPC, 1860) at Police Station Bhagta Bhaika, District Bathinda (Annexure P-1). 6. Briefly stated, the prosecution case is founded upon the statement of the complainant, Preetpal Singh, son of Jagjit Singh, resident of New Dayalpura, District Bathinda. It is alleged that during the year 2024, the complainant purchased 11 killas of agricultural land, comprising 6 killas from Varinder Singh and 5 killas from Anupreet Kaur, and, owing to financial constraints, sought monetary assistance for the said transaction. Through one Rinku Sharma, the complainant came into contact with the present petitioner and the co-accused, who allegedly agreed to advance the requisite amount on interest, subject to the execution GAURAV SOROT 2026.07.14 17:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-33593-2026 (O&M) -:3:- of a sale deed of 5 killas of land as security, with an assurance that the property would be retransferred upon repayment of the principal amount along with interest. 6.1. It is further alleged that, acting under financial compulsion, a sale deed in respect of 5 killas of land was executed in favour of co- accused Avtar Singh Aulakh during the year 2025. However, when the complainant allegedly offered to repay the loan in December 2025, the petitioner and the co-accused resiled from their earlier assurance and refused to reconvey the property. Instead, they allegedly demanded additional land and an extra consideration of 3,00,000/- per acre ₹ . The complainant asserts that an additional amount of 15,00,000/- ₹ was paid to the accused persons, yet they continued to insist upon transfer of the more valuable portion of land situated along the roadside, notwithstanding an earlier settlement arrived at before the village Panchayat. 6.2. The prosecution further alleges that the petitioner, along with the co-accused and two unidentified persons, repeatedly visited the complainant's residence and exerted continuous pressure upon his aged father, Jagjit Singh, demanding transfer of the roadside land. It is alleged that, being unable to withstand the persistent harassment and intimidation, Jagjit Singh consumed a poisonous substance on 02.04.2026 in an attempt to end his life. He was initially admitted to Balvir Hospital, Bhagta Bhaika, where the family declined to initiate legal proceedings. Subsequently, on 03.04.2026, Jagjit Singh allegedly handed over a handwritten suicide note to the complainant, stating that he had taken the extreme step owing to the persistent harassment meted out by the GAURAV SOROT 2026.07.14 17:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-33593-2026 (O&M) -:4:- petitioner and the co-accused. Thereafter, as his condition deteriorated, he was shifted to Rahat Medicare Hospital, Patiala, where he remained on ventilator support in an unconscious condition. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, the present FIR came to be registered against the petitioner and the other accused persons. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case on the basis of wholly baseless and motivated allegations. It is submitted that the petitioner never exerted any pressure upon the deceased to part with the land abutting the road. Rather, the complainant had executed an Agreement to Sell dated 16.05.2024 (Annexure P-2) in favour of the petitioner in respect of 48 kanals of land, after receiving a total sale consideration of 49,88,000/-. However, despite the stipulated date for ₹ execution of the sale deed being 01.12.2025, the complainant failed to honour his contractual obligations. Subsequently, the petitioner discovered that the complainant had alienated the very same property in favour of one Lakhvir Singh vide Sale Deed Nos. 4020 and 4021 dated 19.02.2025 and Sale Deed No. 23 dated 04.04.2025. Consequently, the petitioner instituted a suit for specific performance before the competent Civil Court at Phul on 16.12.2025, wherein an order restraining further alienation of the suit property was passed on the very first date of hearing (Annexures P-5 and P-6). It is further submitted that the petitioner had also moved an application before the Senior Superintendent of Police, Moga, on 09.01.2026, pursuant to which a notice under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 was issued by the Deputy GAURAV SOROT 2026.07.14 17:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-33593-2026 (O&M) -:5:- Superintendent of Police (Headquarters), Moga on 28.02.2026 calling upon the complainant to appear. Since the complainant failed to respond, registration of an FIR against him was recommended, which ultimately came to be registered on 16.04.2026. It is further argued that the allegation in the present FIR that the complainant had executed the sale deed in favour of co-accused Avtar Singh is factually incorrect, as Sale Deed No. 3535 dated 23.01.2025 had in fact been executed by Anupreet Kaur and her minor child in favour of the said co-accused. 8. Per contra, learned State counsel, while placing reliance upon the detailed status report filed by way of an affidavit sworn by Manoj Kumar, PPS, Superintendent of Police, Sub-Division Phul, District Bathinda, in compliance with the order dated 30.06.2026, vehemently opposed the present petition and prayed for its dismissal. It was contended that the petitioner is specifically named not only in the FIR but also in the handwritten suicide note allegedly left by the deceased. According to the prosecution, the petitioner, in active concert with co-accused Avtar Singh and others, persistently harassed, intimidated and pressurised the deceased to part with the more valuable portion of land abutting the road. It is further alleged that the petitioner and the co-accused physically assaulted the deceased and, in a deliberate act of humiliation, forcibly pulled his beard. Learned State counsel submitted that, in the Sikh faith, the beard constitutes an inviolable article of faith and is accorded the highest degree of sanctity and reverence; consequently, any act of forcibly pulling or dishonouring the beard is capable of inflicting profound mental trauma and humiliation. The suicide note, it is submitted, specifically attributes these GAURAV SOROT 2026.07.14 17:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-33593-2026 (O&M) -:6:- acts of harassment and humiliation to the petitioner and the co-accused, and records that such continuous persecution compelled the deceased to take the extreme step. It was further argued that the petitioner's reliance upon the order granting anticipatory bail to co-accused Jaswinder Singh is wholly misplaced and misconceived, inasmuch as the said co-accused was neither named in the FIR nor assigned any specific role therein, whereas the present petitioner is specifically named in both the FIR and the suicide note with distinct and overt allegations. Consequently, the petitioner cannot claim the benefit of parity, as his case stands on an entirely different factual and legal footing. 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at considerable length and have carefully perused the paper book, the status report, and the material available on record with their able assistance. 10. Having bestowed anxious consideration to the rival submissions and the material available on record, this Court is of the considered view that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are grave and prima facie disclose his active involvement in the alleged acts of intimidation, harassment and humiliation attributed to him. At this stage of investigation, the Court is not expected to meticulously appreciate the evidentiary value of the defence sought to be projected by the petitioner. The specific allegations contained in the FIR and the suicide note, coupled with the role attributed to the petitioner, distinguish his case from that of the co-accused who has been granted anticipatory bail. Having regard to the seriousness of the allegations, the nature of the offence, and the stage of investigation, this Court finds no ground to exercise its extraordinary GAURAV SOROT 2026.07.14 17:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-33593-2026 (O&M) -:7:- discretionary jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition, being devoid of merit, is hereby dismissed. 11. In view of the fact that the principal matter stands finally adjudicated, all pending miscellaneous applications, if any, arising out of or ancillary to the present proceedings, shall also stand disposed of accordingly. No separate or further orders are required to be passed in respect thereof. ( VIRINDER AGGARWAL) 14.07.2026 JUDGE Gaurav Sorot Whether reasoned / speaking? Yes / No Whether reportable? Yes / No GAURAV SOROT 2026.07.14 17:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document