Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ravinderpal Singh vs State Of Punjab on 7 January, 2025
Author: Sandeep Moudgil
Bench: Sandeep Moudgil
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:000364
CRM-M-63682-2024 -1-
216
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-63682-2024
DECIDED ON: 07.01.2025
RAVINDERPAL SINGH
.....PETITIONER
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB
.....RESPONDENT
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL
Present: Mr. Gaurav Datta, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Jasjit Singh Rattu, DAG, Punjab.
SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL)
1. Relief sought
The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked under Section
483 of BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No.140,
dated 30.04.2024, under Sections 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of
IPC, 1860 registered at Police Station Sohana, District SAS Nagar, Mohali.
2. Prosecution story setup in the present case as per the version in
the FIR as under:-
“Application no. 6867/ Peshi/ Senior Superintendent of
Police, dated 08.12.2023. To, The Senior Superintendent of
Police, Sahibzada Ajit Singh Nagar. Sub: Application against
Harjinder Singh Dealer Mobile No.98725-95178, Bhagwan
Singh Mob. No.9779134574 (Name a disclosed by the
dealer), describe him as owner of the land and therefore have
committed fraud approximately Rs. 1.37 Crores. Sir, in
reference to the above cited subject, it is respectfully1 of 12
::: Downloaded on – 07-01-2025 23:36:32 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:000364CRM-M-63682-2024 -2-
submitted that I, Didar Singh son of Prem Singh resident of
Village Balialli Tehsil and District Sahibzada Ajit Singh
Nagar. I had talked with Harjinder Singh Dealer resident of
Ballomajra Tehsil and District Sahibzada Ajit Singh Nagar,
Mohali for the purchase of land. Harjit Singh had got done a
deal of land measuring 18 marla situated in Village Mundi
Kharar Tehsil Kharar. The person with whom, the dealer had
got done the deal of land, had told his name as Bhagwan
Singh. Bhagwan has also got issued his Aadhar card and pan
card on the name of Bhagwan Das. The agreement of this
land was got executed on the name of Paramjit Kaur wife of
Didar Singh resident of Village Balialli Tehsil and District
Sahibzada Ajit Singh Nagar. On dated 28.08.2023, advance
money of Rs. 60 Lakh was given i.e. Rs. 30 Lakh in cash and
Rs. 30 Lakh through cheque no. 625959. Further on dated
04.09.2023 an amount of Rs. 10 Lakh was also given.
Thereafter on dated 08.09.2023, an amount of Rs. 7 Lakh was
given to the seller. After that on dated 10.10.2023 an amount
of Rs. 9 Lakh through cheque no. 716513, Rs. 6 Lakh was
given in cash on dated 10.10.2023. Then Rs. 9 Lakh was
given through cheque no. 716517 on dated 13.10.2023, Rs. 6
Lakh through cheque no. 716518 dated 13.10.2023 and then
Rs. 7 Lakh through cheque no. 716519 dated 14.10.2023 to
the seller. The seller had returned the cheque no. 625959 of
Rs.30 Lakh and then received three cheques bearing no.
716507, 716508 and 716509 dated 19.09.2023 and each
cheque was that of Rs. 9/9 Lakh. He said that it is difficult to
clear the cheque of Rs.30 Lakh. Thereafter Rs. 3 Lakh was
given in cash on dated 19.09.2023. After that on dated
19.09.2023, an amount of Rs. 3 Lakh was given in cash.
Therefore the total paid amount comes to Rs. 1,32,00,000/-•
Bhagwan Singh has received this amount by informing his
fake name. The sale deed was to be registered on dated
20.11.2023. But the Bhagwan Singh did not come to get
register the sale deed. We have made phone call to him many
times for the registration of sale deed but he did always
pretend to do so. When we asked him to hand over the2 of 12
::: Downloaded on – 07-01-2025 23:36:33 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:000364CRM-M-63682-2024 -3-
possession, he was again pretending. One day, forged
Bhagwan Singh made phone call from 9779134574 that he
will not get register the sale deed and fraud has been
committed with you. When, we have verified the fact and
came to know that Bhagwan Singh is a forged seller. It is
requested that enquiry in this regard be conducted. My
amount be returned. I shall be thankful to you. Applicant
Didar Singh son of Prem Singh resident of Village Balialli
Tehsil and District Sahibzada Ajit Singh Nagar. Mobile
No.9814216208, 8264742081. The Senior Superintendent of
Police, District Sahibzada Ajit Singh Nagar has marked the
application to Superintendent of Police, Rural District
Sahibzada Ajit Singh Nagar for further action. He has
mentioned in his letter no. 582/5S/ Superintendent of Police,
(Rural) dated 11.03.2024, in the conclusion report that;
During enquiry, it has been found that the applicant had sold
his land situated in the village in the year 2023. He was
willing to purchase commercial land in Mundi Kharar. In this
regard, applicant has hold talk with Harjinder Singh Gill
Property dealer. He is known to Harwinder Singh son of Naib
Singh resident of Village Balialli, who is nephew of the
applicant. Harjinder Singh told to the applicant that he has a
P.G type building in Mundi Kharar District Sahibzada Ajit
Singh Nagar. The applicant has seen the building and was
agreed from the same. Then the opposite party got met the
applicant with fake owner Bhagwan Singh (Who was bearing
Namdhari cloths). The forged has given the photo copy of his
Aadhaar card to the applicant However, the applicant had
belief on the opposite party Harjinder Singh. On dated
25.08.2023, the forged Bhagwan Singh, an amount of Rs. 1
Lakh was given as token money (Sai) to the forged Bhagwan
Singh, Harjinder Singh Dealer, son Amninder Singh, relative
Harnek Singh and Resham @ Kala driver of Bhagwan Singh
in the Sindhi Sweets, near TB2, Near Court Complex, Mohali.
In this regard, the applicant has presented an audio
recording. Thereafter, the applicant entered into an agreement
with the forged Bhagwan Singh with regard to the property /
3 of 12
::: Downloaded on – 07-01-2025 23:36:33 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:000364
CRM-M-63682-2024 -4-
Building land measuring 0 kanal 18 marla comprised of
Khewat no. 190/183. Khatoni no. 206, Khasra no. 14//3/2/2
(2-9) 14//8/2 (2-5) Parts 2 being 5/26 share out of land
measuring 4 kanal 14 marla as per Jamabandi for the year
2019-2020 situated in the area of Village Mundi Kharar,
Hadbast No. 185, Tehsil Kharar District Sahibzada Ajit Singh
Nagar. The agreement to sell was executed on dated
28.08.2023 for sale consideration of Rs. 1.37 Crore in the
name of his wife Paramjit Kaur in the court complex, Mohali.
The date for registration of sale deed was fixed for
31.10.2023. the advance money of Rs. 30 Lakh was given to
the forged Bhagwan Singh through cheque no. 625960 dated
28.08.2023 of Axis Bank, Branch Phase-7, Mohali. Bhagwan
Singh had mentioned the details in this regard at the back side
of the agreement, which is bearing the signatures of Bhagwan
Singh and applicant. Then Bhagwan Singh demanded more
amount of 10 Lakh as advance money. The applicant has
given Rs.10 Lakh on dated 04.09.2023 in cash to Bhagwan
Singh at Mohali. The receipt was reduced in writing and
signatures were done. After some time, Bhagwan Singh said
to the applicant, it is difficult to clear the cheque of Rs. 30
Lakh in his account. The bank officials are saying him to
deposit the cheque of less amount. Then the applicant had
given three cheques to the forged Bhagwan Singh, which are
bearing cheque no. 716507 of Rs. 9 Lakh dated 28.08.2023,
cheque no. 716508 of Rs. 9 Lakh dated 28.08.2023 and
cheque no. 716509 of Rs. 9 Lakh dated 28.08.2023. Then the
forged Bhagwan Singh visited the applicant and returned the
cheque of Rs. 30 Lakh to the applicant. He took the
application in his confidence, got his signatures on the
cheques and then got cleared all the cheques from his bank.
After some time, the forged Bhagwan Singh again demanded
an amount of Rs. 15 Lakh from the applicant. Applicant has
given an amount of Rs. 6 Lakh in cash and an amount of Rs. 9
Lakh through cheque no. 716513 to the applicant on dated
10.10.2023 and receipt has been issued, bearing signatures of
the forged Bhagwan Singh, applicant and Harnek Singh.
4 of 12
::: Downloaded on – 07-01-2025 23:36:33 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:000364
CRM-M-63682-2024 -5-
Thereafter, forged Bhagwan Singh hold talk with applicant t
get registered the deed on 13.10.2023. Then on dated
11.10.2023, Applicant had purchased a stamp paper of an
amount of Rs. 03 Lakh 28 thousand and get registered the
same from deed writer, which bears the signatures of forged
Bhagwan Singh and Paramjeet Kaur wife of the applicant. On
dated 12.10.2023, forged Bhagwan Singh demanded more
amount from the applicant. Then, applicant given a cheque
No. 670570 dated 12.10.2023 bearing amount of Rs. 9 lakh
and cheque No. 149707 dated 12.10.2023 bearing amount of
Rs. 9 lakh to the forged applicant Bhagwan Singh and get
settled the amount from the account of the applicant.
Thereafter, on dated 13.10.2023, applicant party reached at
the office of Tehsildar Kharar. Applicant paid registration fee
of Rs. 1,90,336/- and TDS of Rs. 82 thousand and given
cheque of more amount of Rs. 9 lakh and one cheque No.
716518 dated 13.10.2023 bearing amount of Rs. 6 Lakh to
Bhagwan Singh. Firstly, forged Bhagwan Singh asked the
applicant to get cleared the cheque, then forged Bhagwan
Singh took applicant into confidence and got his signatures
and get cleared the same in his account. Forged Bhagwan
Singh with intention to commit fraud, asked applicant that he
will reach in the office of Tehsildar, Kharar, District SAS
Nagar. Thereafter, forged Bhagwan Singh made excuses to the
applicant and did not reached at the office of Tehsildar,
Kharar, District SAS Nagar and went away on the pretext of
getting done registration later. Thereafter, on dated
26.10.2023, forged Bhagwan Singh hold talk with applicant
with regard to postpone the date of registration and got
prepared the receipt of postponing the date. Date of
registration was mention as 20.11.2023 on the receipt and
promised to deliver the possession of the P.G. on 19.11.2023.
later, Forged Bhagwan Singh neither get done the registration
in favour of the applicant, nor handed over the possession of
the P.G. Thereafter applicant came to know that he was
forged Bhagwan Singh. In this regard, real Bhagwan Singh
was joined in the investigation and his side has been hard. He
5 of 12
::: Downloaded on – 07-01-2025 23:36:33 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:000364
CRM-M-63682-2024 -6-
has recorded in his statement that he had not executed any
agreement or received advance from anyone of his P.G. /
Land Mundi Kharar District SAS Nagar. From the
preliminary enquiry conducted till today, it has been found
that dealer Harjinder Singh Gill under a grave conspiracy,
entered into an agreement of building (P.G.) on a land
situated at Mundi Kharar, District SAS Nagar by presenting a
forged person namely Bhagwan Singh (9779134574) and
during investigation, from the electronic evidence, from the
driver of car no. PB65AZ4986, who used mobile no.
9779134574 of Charanjit Singh @ Karamjit Singh @ Bitu
son of Gurdial Singh @ Dayal Singh resident of Village
Chamali District Ropar as well as in connivance with 2/3
other persons have brought the applicant in the bank, got his
signatures and got withdrawn an amount of Rs.1.19 Crore
from his account in Phase-7 Mohali and have received an
amount of Rs. 6 Lakh in cash. Therefore received total amount
of Rs. 1.25 Crore and then entered into an agreement to sell
the P.G situated in Mundi Kharar, which belong to actual
Bhagwan Singh, which has been executed in the court
complex Mohali. Then did not get registered the sale deed.
They have also done tempering with the Aadhaar card of
actual Bhagwan Singh. Then impersonated as Bhagwan Singh
and appended signatures on the cheques. Further used car
no. PB65AZ4986 Make Verna Fluidic. Then impersonated as
actual Bhagwan Sigh and got N.O.C of the P.G./ Building of
actual Bhagwan Singh. Took the applicant in their confidence,
hatched conspiracy and committed fraud worth Rs. 1.25
Crore. The offence has been found as cognizable, Besides
this, during investigation, if involvement of any other person
will be found, then appropriate legal action will be taken
against them. Therefore, if approved, appropriate directions
be given to Station House Officer, Police Station Sohana to
register FIR U/S 406/419/420/467/468/471/120-B of IPC
against Harjinder Singh Gill (9872595178) S/o Dharam
Singh R/o Village Ballomajra, Tehsil and District SAS Nagar.
Report is hereby presented. Sd. Superintendent of
6 of 12
::: Downloaded on – 07-01-2025 23:36:33 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:000364
CRM-M-63682-2024 -7-
Police(Riral), District Sahibzada Ajit Singh Nagar. Upon this,
Senior Superintendent of Police, District Sahibzada Ajit Singh
Nagar has marked to Station House Officer Police Station
Sohana to register the case and investigation. Sd. Senior
Superintendent of Police, District Sahibzada Ajit Singh
Nagar. Upon receipt, FIR has been registered U/S
406/419/420/467/468/471/120-B of IPC against Harjinder
Singh Gill (9872595178) S/o Dharam Singh R/o Village
Ballomajra, Tehsil and District SAS Nagar, the driver of car
no. PB65AZ4986, who used mobile no. 9779134574, who
used car No. PB65AZ4986 Make Verna Fluidic of forged
Bhagwan Singh as well as against 2/3 other unknown
persons. Registered FIR is sending to Illaqa Magistrate and
senior officers through post (daak). Information has been
given to control room, Mohali. Original application and FIR
were retained for further investigation by I Inspector/SHO.
Instructions had been issued to Record Munshi for completing
record.”
3. Contentions
On behalf of the petitioner
Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the allegation
against the petitioner is that he along with other co-accused has defrauded
the complainant to the tune of Rs.1.25 Crore under the guise of a land sale.
He further contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the
present case as the petitioner has not committed any cheating with the
complainant nor he has received any alleged money. It has been further
contended that there is no specific allegation that the petitioner has received
any alleged money in cash or alleged cheques from the complainant or
presented the same for credit in his account added with the fact that he is a
man of clean antecedents as he is not involved in any other case.
7 of 12
::: Downloaded on – 07-01-2025 23:36:33 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:000364
CRM-M-63682-2024 -8-
He further contended that co-accused namely Kulwinder Singh
has been granted the concession of anticipatory bail by this Court vide order
dated 29.10.2024 passed in CRM-M-54283-2024 (Annexure P-3).
On behalf of the State
On the other hand, learned State counsel has produced the
custody certificate of the petitioner today in Court, which is taken on record.
He seeks dismissal of the instant petition on the ground that the petitioner
along with co-accused has defrauded the complainant to the tune of Rs.1.25
Crore in respect of sale of land and it is the petitioner, who impersonated
Bhagwan Singh, the actual owner of the land and entered into agreement to
sell with the complainant.
4. Analysis
Be that as it may, considering the custody period i.e. 5 months
and 20 days for which the petitioner has suffered incarceration and the fact
that the dispute is related to some agreement to sell; co-accused of the
petitioner namely Kulwinder Singh has been granted the concession of
anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 29.10.2024 passed in CRM-
M-54283-2024 (Annexure P-3); the petitioner is not a habitual offender as
he is not involved in any other case, as is evident from custody certificate in
addition to the fact that investigation is complete, challan stands presented to
Court on 05.10.2024, charges are yet to be framed and total 15 prosecution
witnesses have been cited, which is suffice for this Court to infer that the
conclusion of trial will take long time for which the petitioner cannot be
detained behind the bars for an indefinite period.
8 of 12
::: Downloaded on – 07-01-2025 23:36:33 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:000364
CRM-M-63682-2024 -9-
Reliance can be placed upon the judgment of the Apex Court
rendered in “Dataram versus State of Uttar Pradesh and another“, 2018(2)
R.C.R. (Criminal) 131, wherein it has been held that the grant of bail is a
general rule and putting persons in jail or in prison or in correction home is
an exception. Relevant paras of the said judgment is reproduced as under:-
“2. A fundamental postulate of criminal jurisprudence is
the presumption of innocence, meaning thereby that a
person is believed to be innocent until found guilty.
However, there are instances in our criminal law where a
reverse onus has been placed on an accused with regard
to some specific offences but that is another matter and
does not detract from the fundamental postulate in
respect of other offences. Yet another important facet of
our criminal jurisprudence is that the grant of bail is the
general rule and putting a person in jail or in a prison or
in a correction home (whichever expression one may
wish to use) is an exception. Unfortunately, some of these
basic principles appear to have been lost sight of with the
result that more and more persons are being incarcerated
and for longer periods. This does not do any good to our
criminal jurisprudence or to our society.
3. There is no doubt that the grant or denial of bail is
entirely the discretion of the judge considering a case but
even so, the exercise of judicial discretion has been
circumscribed by a large number of decisions rendered
by this Court and by every High Court in the country. Yet,
occasionally there is a necessity to introspect whether
denying bail to an accused person is the right thing to do
on the facts and in the circumstances of a case.
4. While so introspecting, among the factors that need to
be considered is whether the accused was arrested during
investigations when that person perhaps has the best
opportunity to tamper with the evidence or influence
9 of 12
::: Downloaded on – 07-01-2025 23:36:33 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:000364
CRM-M-63682-2024 -10-
witnesses. If the investigating officer does not find it
necessary to arrest an accused person during
investigations, a strong case should be made out for
placing that person in judicial custody after a charge
sheet is filed. Similarly, it is important to ascertain
whether the accused was participating in the
investigations to the satisfaction of the investigating
officer and was not absconding or not appearing when
required by the investigating officer. Surely, if an accused
is not hiding from the investigating officer or is hiding
due to some genuine and expressed fear of being
victimised, it would be a factor that a judge would need
to consider in an appropriate case. It is also necessary
for the judge to consider whether the accused is a first-
time offender or has been accused of other offences and if
so, the nature of such offences and his or her general
conduct. The poverty or the deemed indigent status of an
accused is also an extremely important factor and even
Parliament has taken notice of it by incorporating an
Explanation to section 436 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973. An equally soft approach to
incarceration has been taken by Parliament by inserting
section 436A in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
5. To put it shortly, a humane attitude is required to be
adopted by a judge, while dealing with an application for
remanding a suspect or an accused person to police
custody or judicial custody. There are several reasons for
this including maintaining the dignity of an accused
person, howsoever poor that person might be, the
requirements of Article 21 of the Constitution and the fact
that there is enormous overcrowding in prisons, leading
to social and other problems as noticed by this Court in
In Re-Inhuman Conditions in 1382 Prisons, 2017(4) RCR
10 of 12
::: Downloaded on – 07-01-2025 23:36:33 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:000364
CRM-M-63682-2024 -11-
(Criminal) 416: 2017(5) Recent Apex Judgments (R.A.J.)
408 : (2017) 10 SCC 658
6. The historical background of the provision for bail has
been elaborately and lucidly explained in a recent
decision delivered in Nikesh Tara chand Shah v. Union of
India, 2017 (13) SCALE 609 going back to the days of
the Magna Carta. In that decision, reference was made to
Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab, (1980) 2 SCC
565 in which it is observed that it was held way back in
Nagendra v. King-Emperor, AIR 1924 Calcutta 476 that
bail is not to be withheld as a punishment. Reference was
also made to Emperor v. Hutchinson, AIR 1931
Allahabad 356 wherein it was observed that grant of bail
is the rule and refusal is the exception. The provision for
bail is therefore age-old and the liberal interpretation to
the provision for bail is almost a century old, going back
to colonial days.
7. However, we should not be understood to mean that
bail should be granted in every case. The grant or refusal
of bail is entirely within the discretion of the judge
hearing the matter and though that discretion is
unfettered, it must be exercised judiciously and in a
humane manner and compassionately. Also, conditions
for the grant of bail ought not to be so strict as to be
incapable of compliance, thereby making the grant of
bail illusory.”
Therefore, to elucidate further, this Court is conscious of the
basic and fundamental principle of law that right to speedy trial is a part of
reasonable, fair and just procedure enshrined under Article 21 of the
Constitution of India. This constitutional right cannot be denied to the
accused as is the mandate of the Apex court in “Hussainara Khatoon and
ors (IV) v. Home Secretary, State of Bihar, Patna“, (1980) 1 SCC 98.
11 of 12
::: Downloaded on – 07-01-2025 23:36:33 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:000364
CRM-M-63682-2024 -12-
Besides this, reference can be drawn upon that pre-conviction period of the
under-trials should be as short as possible keeping in view the nature of
accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the
nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with
the witness or apprehension of threat to the complainant.
5. DECISION:
In view of the discussions made hereinabove, the petitioner is
hereby directed to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail and
surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate,
concerned.
In the afore-said terms, the present petition is hereby allowed.
However, it is made clear that anything stated hereinabove shall
not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
(SANDEEP MOUDGIL)
07.01.2025 JUDGE
Poonam Negi
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
12 of 12
::: Downloaded on - 07-01-2025 23:36:33 :::