CRM-M-27973-2026 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 204 CRM-M-27973-2026 Decided on : 07.08.2026 NARENDER KUMAR ......Petitioner Versus STATE OF HARYANA ......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Present: Mr. Kunal Dawar, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Prashant Vir Gupta, Advocate, and Mr. Saurav Bajaj, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Ruchi Sekhri, Addl. AG, Haryana. **** SANJAY VASHISTH, J. 1. The instant petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.), for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, during the pendency of trial, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:- Name of Petitioner(s) FIR No. Date Section(s) Police Station District Narender Kumar, aged about 64 years 45 30.01.2025 471, 467, 468, 420, 406, 120-B of IPC [corresponding to sections 340(2), 338, 336(3), 318(4), 316(2), 61(2) of BNS] Civil Lines Karnal 2. Brief facts of the present case are reproduced here under:- LAVISHA 2026.08.07 14:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh CRM-M-27973-2026 2 “The brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 29.01.2025 a written complaint against Chirag, Anil and Anil’s wife was received in the police station from the office of Superintendent of Police, Karnal with the subject of lodging FIR against them and their companions on the ground of got registering the property in their name on the basis of fake documents. The complainant alleged that he obtained the copy of sale deed No. 11693/1 dated 16.02.2025 through RTI and then he got to know that the property ID No. IE8P8944 of Village Mukarampur, Karnal was registered in the name of one Suresh Chand son of Dharampal vide aforesaid sale deed No. 11693/1 dated 18.02.2005, whereas the aforesaid sale deed pertain to the area of Village Kailash, in which the mobile number of someone else has been recorded instead of Suresh Chand. The complainant further alleged that on obtaining the copy of sale deed no. 11693/1, it came to light that the said property was actually in the name of one Krishan Kumar son of Dariyao Singh instead of Suresh Chand and the area of property pertains to Village Kailash. The complainant further alleged that Suresh Chand had also submitted his complaint and affidavit in Municipal Corporation, Karnal vide diary no. 814 dated 16.02.2024, in respect of entering of wrong ID in his name and further, said Suresh Chand had also filed a case in the Court for cancellation of sale deed Nos. 9847/1, 9849/1 dated 27.12.2023 and the supplementary sale deed No. 11215/1 dated 09.02.2024. The complainant further alleged that said Suresh Chand was not the owner of plot No. 133, Street No. 6 of Mukarampur whereas in sale deed No. 9847/1 the said property was registered in the name of Chirag Malik from Suresh Chand and the cheque No. 228667 was never encashed in the account of Suresh Chand. In this regard, Suresh Chand had submitted complaints against the accused persons and also filed a case in the Court. The complainant also alleged that he had purchased one plot No. 133 measuring 100 sq. yards from one Satnam against full payment agreement but on the basis of fake document, the accused persons are trying to grab his plot. The complainant further alleged that on 02.12.2024 he visited his plot for raising construction, then Anil’s wife and other females abused and threatened him that if he ever come there then he would be killed. The complainant also filed a civil suit No. 2670 of 2024 LAVISHA 2026.08.07 14:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh CRM-M-27973-2026 3 titled as “Satnam Vs. Chirag Malik”. Hence, the complainant prayed for taking legal action against the culprits. Hence, the above FIR.” 3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is about 64 years of age and has never been found involved in any similar activity in the past. It is further submitted that petitioner's role is limited to the fact that he had initially agreed to purchase 200 square yards of land from one Suresh Chand through a property dealer, namely Devraj @ Dev Raj (co-accused). Pursuant thereto, an agreement to sell was executed, conferring upon petitioner the right not only to purchase the property but also to transfer his rights in favour of any third person. Thereafter, instead of obtaining the sale deed in his own name, petitioner got the property directly conveyed by Suresh Chand in favour of Chirag and Anil. Subsequently, Suresh Chand passed away. 4. It is further submitted that petitioner has been implicated in the present case, solely on the ground that an amount of Rs.20 lakhs, being the sale consideration paid by the purchasers, was credited to his bank account by the seller-Suresh Chand. During investigation, Chirag and Anil, who were shown as purchasers in the sale deed, were found not to be the real beneficiaries of the transaction. Consequently, investigating agency treated the property as having been purchased benami by the petitioner, while Chirag and Anil were declared innocent. 5. It is further submitted that investigation has been completed and challan has already been presented before the competent Court. Offences alleged are triable by the Court of learned Magistrate, and LAVISHA 2026.08.07 14:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh CRM-M-27973-2026 4 conclusion of trial is not likely in the near future. Petitioner is inside jail since 24.03.2026, and no useful purpose would be served by prolonging his incarceration any further. Additionally, it is submitted that co-accused Devraj @ Dev Raj has already been granted the concession of regular bail by this Court, vide order dated 03.07.2026 passed in CRM-M-31824-2026. Thus, learned Senior Counsel prays for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in the present case. 6. Learned State counsel, while opposing the prayer for grant of regular bail and submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner, submits that petitioner is involved in a serious offence. Thus, petitioner is not entitled to the concession of regular bail. 7. This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties and has perused the record available before it. 8. Undoubtedly, investigation stands concluded and challan has already been presented. Offences alleged are triable by the Court of learned Magistrate, and conclusion of the trial is not likely in the near future. Petitioner is in custody since 24.03.2026. His continued incarceration, particularly considering his advanced age of about 64 years, may adversely affect his rights. Furthermore, co-accused Devraj @ Dev Raj has already been granted the concession of regular bail by this Court, vide order dated 03.07.2026 passed in CRM-M-31824-2026. Moreover, petitioner is also entitled to the benefit of special LAVISHA 2026.08.07 14:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh CRM-M-27973-2026 5 consideration, envisaged under Section 480 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS). 9. Keeping in view the totality of circumstances, nature of the allegations, stage of the proceedings, period of custody undergone by the petitioner, and the factors noticed here above, this Court deems it appropriate to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner in the present case. Consequently, prayer made in the present petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, subject to his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/ Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Illaqa Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case. 10. Needless to observe that the petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witness in any manner directly or indirectly. 11. Any of the discussion done and recorded here above, shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the facts of the case. Therefore, trial Court is expected to decide the case by taking an independent view, on the basis of evidence available on record, as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law. 12. Petition stands disposed of. (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE 07.08.2026 Lavisha Whether Speaking/Reasoned: YES/NO Whether Reportable: YES/NO LAVISHA 2026.08.07 14:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh