Chaman Lal and Anr v. State of Punjab

ANOOP CHITKARA, J. FIR No. Dated Police Sta/on Sec/ons 26 01.08.2024 NRI, District Kapurthala 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 474, 120-B IPC

¶1The pe!!oners apprehending arrest in the FIR cap!oned above have come up before this Court under Sec!on 482 of Bhara!ya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], (erstwhile Sec!on 438 CrPC) seeking an!cipatory bail.

¶2In paragraph 14 of the bail pe!!on, the accused declare that they have no criminal antecedents.

¶3The facts and allega!ons are being taken from the status report filed by the State, which reads as follows: "2. That present FIR No.26 dated 01.08.2024 Under sec-ons 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 474, 120-B Police Sta-on NRI Kapurthala, District Kapurthala was registered on the basis of complaint bearing UID No.2407551 filed by complainant Chanda Sidhu Atwal to the ADGP, NRI Wing Punjab for taking ac-on against Satnam Singh, Harnek Singh and Chaman Lal on the allega-ons that they all hatched criminal conspiracy and prepared forged and fabricated Will dated 07.04.2008 on the name of JYOTI Jagdish Kaur Sidhu in favor of Satnam Singh in order to usurp the property order/judgment. 1 measuring 27 Acres, inherited by the complainant being only legal heir of her Massi Jagdish Kaur Sidhu who died intestate on 24.04.2019 and muta-on no. 51763 was sanc-oned.

¶3That it has further come on record that on alleged dated i.e. 07.04.2008 Jagdish Kaur Sidhu was not found present in India, moreover a<er her death on 24.04.2019, forged and fabricated 'Will' was prepared to usurp the property of deceased Jagdish Kaur Sidhu, as such pe--oners along with co-accused Satnam Singh with malafide inten-on have prepared forged and fabricated 'Will' purportedly being made by Jagdish Kaur Sidhu as such a<er due enquiry, Enquiry Officer recommended to register FIR against Harnek Singh, Satnam Singh and Chaman Lal."

¶4The pe!!oners' counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent condi!ons and contends that further pre-trial incarcera!on would cause an irreversible injus!ce to the pe!!oners and their family.

¶5The State's counsel opposes bail and refers to the status report.

¶6The complainant also opposes the bail.

¶7It would be appropriate to refer to the following por!ons of the status report, which read as follows: "5. That there are specific allega-ons against the pe--oners for conniving with co-accused Satnam Singh of preparing forged 'Will' in order to usurp the property measuring 27 Acres as both the pe--oners stood as witness in the alleged forged 'WILL' hence present FIR was rightly registered against them thus present pe--on is liable to be dismissed. Evidence Collected against pe--oner

¶6That complainant has levelled specific allega-ons against pe--oner and co-accused of fabrica-ng Will in the name of Jagdish Kaur Sidhu in order to usurp her property. It has come on record that deceased Jagdish Kaur Siddoo never visited India on 07.04.2008 to execute the alleged will in ques-on. The travel history of the deceased Jagdish Kaur Siddoo has been obtained which shows that the deceased never visited India on the date men-oned to execute the alleged will. It is per-nent to men-on here that both the pe--oners stood as witness in the alleged forged 'Will' thus both pe--oners ac-vely connived in preparing forged 'WILL'. It is per-nent to men-on here that AIG NRI Wing Jalandhar has procured travel history of deceased Jagdish Kaur Siddoo from Bureau of Immigra-on, Ministry Of order/judgment. 2 Home Affairs, Government of India and as per their communica-on it transpired that Jagdish Kaur Siddoo le< India on 27.03.2008 and came to India on 11.11.2008 and therea<er she le< India on 13.05.2009 as such it is very much evident that Jagdish Kaur Siddoo was not present in India on

07.04.2008 i.e. date of execu-on of forged WILL hence it is very much evident that pe--oners connived with other co-accused in forging said 'WILL' thus present pe--on is liable to be dismissed."

¶8The pe!!oners' case is on a lower foo!ng than the main accused.

¶9Pre-trial incarcera!on should not be a replica of post-convic!on sentencing. The evidence might be prima facie sufficient to launch prosecu!on or to frame charges, but this Court is not considering the evidence at that stage but is analyzing it for the stage of an!cipatory bail. An analysis of the above does not jus!fy custodial interroga!on or pre-trial incarcera!on.

¶10Given the above, the penal provisions invoked coupled with the primafacie analysis of the nature of allega!ons and the other factors peculiar to this case, there would be no jus!fiability for custodial interroga!on or the pre-trial incarcera!on at this stage. Without commen!ng on the case's merits, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and for the reasons men!oned above, the pe!!oners make a case for bail. This order shall come into force from the !me it is uploaded on this Court's official webpage.

¶11Given above, provided the pe!!oners are not required in any other case, the pe!!oners shall be released on an!cipatory bail in the FIR cap!oned above subject to furnishing bonds to the sa!sfac!on of the Arres!ng Officer, and if the ma(er is before a Court, then the concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before accep!ng the surety, the concerned Officer/Court must be sa!sfied that if the accused fails to appear, such surety can produce the accused.

¶12While furnishing a personal bond, the pe!!oner shall men!on the following personal iden!fica!on details:

¶1AADHAR number

¶2Passport number (If available) and when the a(es!ng officer/court considers it appropriate or considers the accused a flight risk.

¶3Mobile number (If available)

¶4E-Mail id (If available)

¶13This order is subject to the pe!!oner's complying with the following terms.JYOTI order/judgment. 3

¶14The pe--oners are directed to join the inves-ga-on within seven days of uploading this order on the official webpage of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana and as and when called by the Inves-gator. The pe!!oners shall be in deemed custody for Sec!on 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872/ Sec!on 23 of BSA, 2023. The pe!!oners shall join the inves!ga!on as and when called by the Inves!ga!ng Officer or any Superior Officer and shall cooperate with the inves!ga!on at all further stages as required. In the event of failure to do so, the prosecu!on will be open to seeking cancella!on of the bail. During the inves!ga!on, the pe!!oners shall not be subjected to third-degree, indecent language, inhuman treatment, etc.

¶15The pe!!oners shall abide by all statutory bond condi!ons and appear before the concerned Court(s) on all dates. The pe!!oner shall not tamper with the evidence, influence, browbeat, pressurize, induce, threaten, or promise, directly or indirectly, any witnesses, Police officials, or any other person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case or dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Police or the Court.

¶16In case the Inves!gator/Officer-In-Charge of the concerned Police Sta!on arraigns another sec!on of any penal offense in this FIR, and if the new sec!on prescribes a maximum sentence that is not greater than the sec!ons men!oned above, then this bail order shall be deemed to have also been passed for the newly added sec!on(s). However, suppose the newly inserted sec!ons prescribe a sentence exceeding the maximum sentence prescribed in the sec!ons men!oned above; then, in that case, the Inves!gator/Officer-In-Charge shall give the pe!!oners no!ce of a minimum of seven days, providing an opportunity to avail the remedies available in law.

¶17This bail is condi!onal, and the founda!onal condi!on is that if the pe!!oners indulge in any non-bailable offense, the State may file an applica!on for cancella!on of this bail before the Sessions Court, which shall be at liberty to cancel this bail.

¶18Any observa!on made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments.

¶19A cer!fied copy of this order would not be needed for furnishing bonds, and any Advocate for the Pe!!oner can download this order along with case status from the official web page of this Court and a(est it to be a true copy. If the a(es!ng officer wants to verify its authen!city, such an officer can also verify its authen!city and may download and use the downloaded copy for a(es!ng bonds. order/judgment. 4

¶20Pe//on allowed in terms men!oned above. All pending applica!ons, if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE

28.11.2024 Jyo/-II Whether reportable: No. order/judgment. 5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Reserved on: 12.11.2024 Pronounced on: 28.11.2024 Chaman Lal and another ...Pe!!oners Versus State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present: Mr. Aditya Anand, Advocate, for the pe!!oners. Mr. Akshay Kumar, AAG, Punjab. Mr. H.S. Ba(h, Advocate, for the complainant. ****