CRM-M-26311-2026 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 218 CRM-M-26311-2026 Date of decision: 17.07.2026 PARGAT SINGH ......PETITIONER Versus STATE OF PUNJAB . ..... RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA PARTAP SINGH Present: Mr. Abhaysher Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. I.P.S. Sabharwal, DAG, Punjab. ***** SURYA PARTAP SINGH, J. 1. This petition for bail is the second petition, filed by the petitioner under Section 483 of ‘the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023’. This petition has been filed with regard to a case arising out of FIR No.358 dated 04.11.2019, for the commission of offence punishable under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of Indian Penal Code, Police Station Sohana, SAS Nagar, (Mohali). 2. The abovementioned FIR came into being at the instance of ‘Narinder Singh Lochab’, hereinafter being referred to as ‘complainant’ only. It was stated by the complainant that he along with his brother, ‘Avtar Singh’, was living in Kenya, and that in July 1974, they had jointly purchased 22 acres of land, in equal shares at Village Kaimbala, Tehsil and District SAS Nagar (Mohali). VIPIN KUMAR 2026.07.18 18:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-26311-2026 2 3. The pith and substance of the allegations of the complainant was that his brother ‘Avtar Singh’ died in Kenya in the year 1976 and he (complainant) is still alive, but some land grabbers including ‘Pritpal Singh @ Dali’, forged a Will of ‘Avtar Singh’ in the year 2019, and thereafter, created a fake death certificate of ‘Avtar Singh’, showing his death, in the year 2020 and thereby claimed ownership over the share of ‘Avtar Singh’ on the basis of above-mentioned Will. 4. It had also been alleged by the complainant that qua his own share also, the claim had been launched by projecting that the complainant had executed a Power of Attorney for the sale of his above-mentioned property. 5. It is the case of the prosecution that in view of above-mentioned information, formal FIR of this case was lodged and the investigation taken up. According to prosecution, during the course of investigation it has transpired that there are two Wills, alleged to have been executed by ‘Avtar Singh’, and that in one of the Will, the ‘Pritpal Singh @ Dali’ is a beneficiary. 6. Notice of motion. 7. Since advance notice has already been served upon the State, Mr. I.P.S. Sabharwal, DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State. Hence, the service of notice upon the State is hereby dispensed with. The learned State Counsel has filed custody certificate of the petitioner. The same be taken on record. No formal reply has been filed by the State. However the learned State counsel has orally opposed the present petition. 8. Heard. 9. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the first petition filed by the petitioner was not decided on merits as it was VIPIN KUMAR 2026.07.18 18:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-26311-2026 3 withdrawn by the petitioner, and therefore, second petition is maintainable. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is innocent, who has been falsely implicated in the present case without any evidence. The learned counsel for the petitioner has further contended that in the present case the allegations against the petitioner are that he is responsible for a conspiracy, wherein the Will of ‘Avtar Singh’ (deceased) was forged in favour of ‘Pritpal Singh’ by ‘Dayal Singh’, now deceased, (hereinafter being referred to as fake ‘Avtar Singh’). According to learned counsel for the petitioner, neither the petitioner is beneficiary of the above-mentioned Will nor he was signatory to the above-mentioned Will in any capacity. 10. It has been further contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that despite being alien to the above-mentioned allegedly forged documents, merely on the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused, the petitioner is being prosecuted on the ground that he was part of the conspiracy hatched for creation of false documents. It has also been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that otherwise also the petitioner has clean antecedents, and that he has already suffered incarceration in the present case for a period of more than eleven months. As per learned counsel for the petitioner since trial is not likely to be concluded in near future and detention of petitioner will not serve any purpose, the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of bail. 11. The learned State counsel has controverted the above-mentioned arguments. It has been contended by learned State counsel that instant case is a case of very serious nature, wherein there has been an attempt to usurp the property of foreign based Indian citizen, by creating false documents. According to learned State counsel ‘Avtar Singh’ was co-owner of the above- VIPIN KUMAR 2026.07.18 18:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-26311-2026 4 mentioned property, who died in Kenya in the year 1976 and after his death, in the year 2019, in active connivance with the petitioner, who was care taker of the property of ‘Avtar Singh’, his Will was prepared by introducing ‘Dayal Singh’ as ‘Avtar Singh’. As per learned State counsel although the petitioner was not signatory to the above-mentioned document, but during the course of investigation, it has been revealed that in order to draw benefit of above- mentioned forged documents, the petitioner had got executed one agreement to sell in his favour with regard to property of ‘Avtar Singh’. As per learned State counsel the above-mentioned agreement to sell was got executed from fake ‘Avtar Singh’ (i.e. Dayal Singh). In view of above, the learned State counsel has contended that proximity of petitioner with the commission of crime stands established in this case, and that it does not lie in the mouth of petitioner that he, not being beneficiary of the forged Will, has no concern, whatsoever with the forgery/fraud. 12. The record has been perused carefully. 13. A perusal of record shows that in the present case, following are the relevant factors which are required to be taken into consideration for a decision: - i) that the bail petition filed by co-accused ‘Pritpal Singh’ has already been dismissed by virtue of order dated 27.02.2026; ii) that this plea taken by the petitioner is true that neither the petitioner is a beneficiary of the Will nor a signatory thereto. However, the stand of the prosecution is that petitioner is active connivance with the impersonator and VIPIN KUMAR 2026.07.18 18:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-26311-2026 5 beneficiary of the forged documents, and that in order to draw benefit, himself got executed an agreement to sell in his own favour. Since petitioner is stated to be care taker of the property at the instance of ‘Avtar Singh’ (the owner of the property), he must be aware of the fact that ‘Avtar Singh’ had died in the year 1976. Moreover, the petitioner must be aware of the identity of the real owner of the property. But despite above-mentioned knowledge he got executed an agreement to sell in his own favour, executed by fake ‘Avtar Singh’. The above-mentioned fact supports the prosecution case and speaks in volume against the conduct of the petitioner; iii) that offence allegedly committed by the petitioner is punishable with imprisonment for life, and thus, the offence alleged to have been committed by the petitioner is very serious in nature. 14. Taking into consideration the cumulative effect of all the above- mentioned factors coupled with the fact that prima facie petitioner has direct nexus with the creation of false documents with the help of fake ‘Avtar Singh’, it is hereby observed that at this stage, the petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of bail, and that the present petition is devoid of merit. In view of above-mentioned observations, finding no merit, the present petition is hereby dismissed, accordingly. (SURYA PARTAP SINGH) JUDGE 17.07.2026 Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No vipin Whether reportable Yes/No VIPIN KUMAR 2026.07.18 18:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document