CRM-M-10817-2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 208 CRM-M-10817-2026 Decided on: 20.07.2026 Parminder Singh …...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Present: Mr. Shakti Mehta, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Vinay Malhotra, DAG Punjab Mr. Ishan Gupta, Advocate and Ms. Vrinda Kalra, Advocate for the complainant **** SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (ORAL) 1. Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438 Cr.P.C.), is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of FIR No.0050 dated 06.04.2025 registered under Sections 420, 406 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Dirba, District Sangrur, Punjab. 2. On 25.02.2026, following order was passed: “(i) xx xx xx xx (ii) Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that present matter is of civil nature and already a civil suit i.e. suit for specific performance has been filed by the complainant for execution of the sale deed; other co-accused, namely, Chajju Ram, Baldev Singh and Gurbhej Singh have already been granted the concession of anticipatory bail by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur vide orders dated 16.04.2026 (Annexures P-4 to P-6 respectively) and one co-accused, namely, Harpreet Kaur has also been granted REENA 2026.07.22 09:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-10817-2026 the concession of interim anticipatory bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 04.02.2026 passed in CRM-M No.70780 of 2025 (Annexure P- 7); the petitioner is not involved in any other case and having clean and clear antecedents; the petitioner is ready to join the investigation and co-operate with the investigating agency, hence, learned counsel prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. (iii) Learned State counsel appeared on advance notice and submitted that present petitioner received earnest money regarding the property, which was already under lien of the bank; on the day decided by the parties, the petitioner did not come to Registrar’s office to get the sale deed executed; thereafter, the petitioner entered into another agreement to sell with the complainant and again got ready to execute the sale deed of his residential house after receiving an amount of Rs.15,00,000/-, however, he again failed to execute the same. Thus, intention to cheat the complainant was there from the very inception. However, it is fairly admitted that as per the record, the petitioner is not involved in any other criminal activity except the present case. (iv) Mr. Ishan Gupta, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant and filed his power of attorney. The same is taken on record. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail; he is not on parity with other co-accused, who were granted bail as they were attributed the role of attesting witnesses; the petitioner is executant as well as beneficiary of the agreement to sell; previously, the petitioner entered into an agreement to sell with the complainant regarding the land measuring 09 kanals, 07 marlas and received an amount of Rs.13,00,000/- in his account and Rs.1,00,000/- in cash, but he failed to execute the sale deed as there was a lien from the bank on the said property; thereafter, a compromise was effected between the parties and a second agreement was executed after paying an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- in addition to the amount of Rs.14,00,000/- earlier paid by the complainant for the residential house of the petitioner; but the petitioner did not come forward to execute the sale deed. As such, learned counsel prayed for dismissal of the present petition. (v) Heard. (vi) Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and the contentions of learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned State counsel that a suit for specific performance has already been filed by the complainant for execution of the sale deed; the parties entered into a second agreement and as per mutual understanding, the earnest money of Rs.14,00,000/- received by the petitioner at the time of first agreement, was adjusted in second agreement; REENA 2026.07.22 09:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-10817-2026 other co-accused, namely, Chajju Ram, Baldev Singh and Gurbhej Singh have already been granted the concession of anticipatory bail by learned Additional Sessions Judge Sangrur vide order dated 16.04.2026 (Annexures P-4 to P-6 respectively) and one co-accused, namely, Harpreet Kaur has also been granted the concession of interim anticipatory bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 04.02.2026 passed in CRM-M No.70780 of 2025 (Annexure P- 7); the petitioner is not required for custodial interrogation as nothing is to be recovered from him; the petitioner is not involved in any other criminal activities except the present case, so, taking into consideration the totality of the circumstances, this Court finds merit in the present petition and the petitioner is directed to join the investigation as and when required by Investigating Officer. In the event of his arrest, the petitioner shall be admitted to interim bail on furnishing of bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of investigating/arresting officer till the next date of hearing subject to the conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023 (erstwhile Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.). (vii) Adjourned to 30.04.2026.” 3. Learned State counsel on instructions from ASI Gurmeet Singh submits that the petitioner has joined the investigation on 07.03.2026, and as of now, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of investigation. 4. Since, petitioner has already joined the investigation and custodial interrogation is no more required; ad-interim bail order dated 25.02.2026 passed by this Court is hereby made absolute. Accordingly, present petition is allowed. 5. The petitioner shall continue to join the investigation as and when required to do so and abide by all the terms and conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023. 6. However, passport which has not been handed over, be handed over within one week, otherwise the order confirming anticipatory bail would be deemed to be inoperative for all intents and purposes. REENA 2026.07.22 09:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-10817-2026 7. It is clarified that in case, aforesaid condition is not complied with, this order would be considered as non est automatically. (SANJAY VASHISTH) 20.07.2026 JUDGE reena Whether Speaking/Reasoned: YES/NO Whether Reportable: YES/NO REENA 2026.07.22 09:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh