Punjab-Haryana High Court
Gurleen Singh Walia vs State Of Ut Chandigarh And Anr on 6 March, 2024
Author: Manjari Nehru Kaul
Bench: Manjari Nehru Kaul
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:032471
2024:PHHC:032471
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-4887-2024 (O&M)
Reserved on 01.03.2024
Pronounced on: 06.03.2024
Gurleen Singh Walia .....Petitioner
Versus
State of U.T. Chandigarh and another .....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL
Argued by : Mr. Vinod Ghai, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. Jasdev Singh Mehndiratta, Advocate and
Mr. Arnav Ghai, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Manish Bansal, P.P., U.T., Chandigarh assisted by
Mr. Navjit Singh and Ms. Diksha Sharma, Advocates
SI Suresh Kumar.
Ms. Navdeender P.K. Singh, Advocate and
Mr. Gagandeep Rana, Advocate for respondent No.2.
****
MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J.
1. The petitioner is seeking the concession of anticipatory
bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in case FIR No.057 dated
03.05.2023 under Sections 420, 120-B of the IPC (Sections 467, 468
and 471of the IPC added lateron) registered at Police Station Central,
Sector 17, Chandigarh.
SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
THE PETITIONER
2. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has made the
following submissions:-
2 (i). That the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case
at hand by her nephew, i.e. the complainant on account of a property
dispute; the criminal proceedings which had been initiated by the
1 of 10
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:032471
2024:PHHC:032471
CRM-M-4887-2024 (O&M) -2-
complainant and his mother were a gross abuse of the process of law
and misuse of all the enforcement machinery; on an earlier occasion
also an application had been filed under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C.
by the complainant against the petitioner and her husband on the same
facts, seeking registration of the FIR, but the same was rightly
dismissed by the learned Trial Court on 19.04.2023, holding that a civil
dispute was being given a criminal colour.
2 (ii). That the genesis of the dispute revolves around House
No.47, Sector 27-A, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred as 'house in
question'), which was solely owned by the father of the petitioner and
grandfather of the complainant Ajit Singh (hereinafter referred to as 'the
deceased'). Throughout his life, the deceased allowed only his daughter
i.e. the petitioner and her children to reside in the house in question.
The complainant never lived there with the deceased and even the
father of the complainant resided at Kolkata where he was running
some business. In addition, the complainant's parents were divorced in
the year 2003 and thereafter the complainant along with his mother had
been residing separately from the deceased at their accommodation in
Manimajra, Chandigarh.
2 (iii). That the complainant and his mother had since long been
eyeing the house in question and all their previous attempts to succeed
in their designs had failed as it was a matter of record that the civil suit
filed by the mother of the complainant seeking to restrain the deceased
from alienating the house in question was dismissed by the Civil Court,
Chandigarh vide judgment and decree dated 22.05.2014. A suit for
specific performance with respect to an agreement to sell qua the house
2 of 10
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:032471
2024:PHHC:032471
CRM-M-4887-2024 (O&M) -3-
in question had been filed by one Bhupinder Singh Bakshi which was
also dismissed on 05.04.2014 by the Civil Court.
2 (iv). That in a Will executed by the deceased in 2007, he
divided his properties equally between the petitioner and her brother
(father of the complainant), however, father of the complainant passed
away in the year 2010. Subsequently, the deceased executed a new Will
in the year 2017 bequeathing all his properties solely to the petitioner,
excluding the complainant and his sister with provisions for them,
contingent upon certain conditions. Learned senior counsel submits that
thus it was evident that from the very beginning, the deceased had
desired to transfer the house in question in favour of the petitioner.
2 (v). That the right of the petitioner to the house in question
stood further solidified when a Regular Second Appeal No.4310 of
2014 which had been filed by aforesaid Bhupinder Singh Bakshi to
impugn the judgment dated 05.04.2014 passed by the Civil Court, was
dismissed by the High Court in the year 2022. Thereafter, since there
was no impediment, the deceased transferred the house in question in
the name of the petitioner through a transfer deed in October, 2022; the
petitioner who took care of her father i.e. the deceased during his illness
and the transfer of the house in the name of the petitioner had been
willingly done by the deceased himself. However, the complainant had
objected to this transfer by sending a letter dated 17.01.2023 to the
Estate Office purported to have been written by the deceased.
2 (vi). That the said objection letter by the complainant was
forged by him with an oblique motive which fact stood corroborated
from the opinion given by some handwriting experts in the said regard.
3 of 10
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:032471
2024:PHHC:032471
CRM-M-4887-2024 (O&M) -4-
Not only this, the complainant had forged a Power of Attorney (POA)
purportedly executed by the deceased in favour of one lawyer, Ms.
Palak Dev as well as a Will wherein the deceased bequeathed 100%
share in the house in question in the complainant's favour. In support,
learned senior counsel has placed reliance upon Annexures P-13 to P-
20.
2 (vii). That the complainant has levelled baseless allegations qua
the No Objection Certificate (NOC) having been forged by the
petitioner. He has cited the advance age of the deceased as well as his
health as one of the factors that could have naturally lead to slight
deviations in signatures on the documents which were sent to the FSL
for comparison.
SUBMISSIONS OF RESPONDENT NO.2-COMPLAINANT
3. Learned counsel for respondent No.2-complainant has
vehemently opposed the submissions made by the counsel opposite bby
submitting as under:-
3 (i). That the petitioner exploited the ill health and trust of her
own father, Ajit Singh, i.e. the deceased for her own gain. No doubt, the
complainant, who is the grandson of the deceased, resided with his
mother after the divorce of his parents in the year 2003; however, the
complainant had a very close relationship with his grandfather, often
staying at his house (house in question) for a few days every week,
where he even had his own room and office from where he was
practicing as a lawyer. Furthermore, even in his bank accounts, for
example, the address given was of the house in question which clearly
left no manner of doubt that the complainant was residing with both his
4 of 10
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:032471
2024:PHHC:032471
CRM-M-4887-2024 (O&M) -5-
mother and as well as his grandfather in their respective houses, but he
also enjoyed a cordial and warm relationship with his grandfather; on
account of the fact that he was a struggling lawyer, his grandfather
would deposit Rs.15,000/- into his bank account every month which
fact was supported by his bank statement and it lent further credence to
the complainant and his grandfather sharing a close bond.
3 (ii). That the deceased had executed two registered Wills, one
on 01.09.2017 and another on 14.09.2020, bequeathing 65% of the
ownership of the house in question to the petitioner and the remaining
35% to the complainant and his sister out of love for his grandchildren.
3 (iii). That in June, 2022, the complainant informed his aunt i.e.
the petitioner about the deteriorating health of the deceased and
requested her to visit India. However, the petitioner returned to India
with a malicious intent to fraudulently get the ownership of the house in
question transferred to herself, taking advantage of the illness of the
deceased. Despite the fragile health of the deceased, the petitioner
pressured him to undergo 20 radiations within a month, leaving him in
a dying state before clandestinely leaving for the USA. Following this,
the complainant took care of his grandfather i.e. the deceased and
nursed him back to health. The deceased feeling deceived by the
petitioner, wrote a letter to the Estate Office objecting to the transfer
deed executed by him earlier in favour of the petitioner as the latter had
taken undue advantage of his health and age.
3 (iv). That the deceased thereafter executed a Will in favour of
the complainant bequeathing 100% share in house in question in his
favour.
5 of 10
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:032471
2024:PHHC:032471
CRM-M-4887-2024 (O&M) -6-
3 (v). That factually incorrect averments have been made by the
petitioner that transfer deed was not challenged; it was a matter of
record that the deceased himself in his lifetime had filed a civil suit to
get the transfer deed dated 18.10.2022 cancelled.
3 (vi). That the allegations by the petitioner against the
complainant of having forged the letter dated 17.01.2023, were made
only after the registration of the instant FIR which clearly indicated that
an attempt was being made by the petitioner to evade criminal liability.
3 (vii). That the petitioner with an oblique motive had isolated the
deceased by giving specific instructions even in the hospital where the
deceased was admitted, that no one except herself, her husband and one
attendant be allowed to enter the ward of the deceased, and pressured
him to sign an NOC under duress, which fact stood supported by an
audio recording to the said effect. Attention of this Court is drawn to
Annexure R-11, which is the transcription of said audio recording.
When the petitioner could not succeed in her designs, she submitted
false documents to the Estate Office, Chandigarh including a forged
NOC, committing forgery against both the complainant as well as the
State. On account of the serious nature of the offences, the Estate
Officer had also forwarded a complaint qua the forgery committed by
the petitioner to the DCP. In the meanwhile, the husband of the
petitioner conveniently fled away from the country along with all the
relevant and important documents pertaining to the house in question.
3 (viii). That the petitioner had been making attempts to impede the
investigation by also extending threats to the complainant of dire
consequences through a gangster named Bhupi Rana on her behalf, in
6 of 10
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:032471
2024:PHHC:032471
CRM-M-4887-2024 (O&M) -7-
which regard, fearing for his life, the complainant had promptly
forwarded a complaint to SSP Chandigarh (Annexure R-6).
3 (ix). That the complainant was threatened of dire consequences
over the phone by the gangster when he was stiffly opposing the
application filed by the petitioner for permission to go abroad. The
conduct of the petitioner, thus, left no manner of doubt that she had
been unabashedly misusing the concession of bail which had been
initially granted to her under Sections 420 and 120-B of the IPC by
colluding with anti social elements, which raised serious concerns
about the safety of the complainant.
SUBMISSIONS OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR U.T.
CHANDIGARH
4. Learned Public Prosecutor appearing for U.T. Chandigarh
has also on instructions submitted that the custodial interrogation of the
petitioner was required as the report received from the FSL had
confirmed that the documents including the NOC submitted before the
Estate Office by the petitioner were forged documents. It has been
further submitted that in addition to the aforestated, there was a serious
flight risk posed by the petitioner given that she was a resident of USA
and her husband had already left India. Learned Public Prosecutor has
also corroborated that a complaint had been received from the
complainant to the police with respect to the telephonic threats he had
received from a gangster asking him to not pursue the case, else he
would face dire consequences. Learned Public Prosecutor informed the
Court that the matter was under investigation by the Punjab Police.
7 of 10
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:032471
2024:PHHC:032471
CRM-M-4887-2024 (O&M) -8-
REBUTTAL BY THE PETITIONER
5. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has vehemently
rebutted the contentions made by the counsel for the complainant and
the Public Prosecutor, U.T., Chandigarh with respect to the threats
allegedly extended to the complainant by some gangster. It has been
asserted that the petitioner has no connection with the alleged gangster
whatsoever, who threatened the complainant. Learned senior counsel
submits that in fact the petitioner herself had filed an application before
the DGP, Chandigarh Police (Annexure P-45) to enquire into the
alleged threats made to the complainant by some gangster named Bhupi
Rana. It has been submitted that rather the petitioner had cooperated
with the police by reporting the forgery committed by none other than
the complainant.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
relevant material on record.
7. No doubt, the petitioner was indeed granted the concession
of anticipatory bail by the learned Trial Court for offences under
Sections 420, 120-B of the IPC. However, it is pertinent to note that
when the concession of anticipatory bail was extended to the petitioner,
the CFSL report had not been received. Subsequently, upon receipt of
the CFSL report, it was revealed that the documents, including NOC
allegedly executed in favour of the petitioner by the deceased, were
forged documents. Furthermore, after the petitioner was granted the
concession of anticipatory bail, the complainant allegedly received
telephonic threats from some gangster, explicitly warning him against
pursuing the case against the petitioner under threat of dire
8 of 10
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:032471
2024:PHHC:032471
CRM-M-4887-2024 (O&M) -9-
consequences. These threats were promptly reported to the police by the
complainant.
8. Although learned senior counsel for the petitioner
vehemently argued that there existed no concrete evidence to link the
petitioner with the alleged telephonic threats received by the
complainant, however, as per the complaint given by the complainant to
the police, the threat calls pertained to pressurizing the complainant to
withdraw present case, which aspect would warrant a thorough
investigation.
9. Additionally, it would also be relevant to highlight an
undisputed fact, regarding the circumstances surrounding the alleged
issuance of the NOC by the deceased. It is a matter of record that the
deceased was indisputably hospitalized in a serious condition at the
time when the NOC was purportedly executed. Despite the vehement
assertions made by learned senior counsel for the petitioner regarding
the deceased being in a sound mental state at the time of the execution
of the NOC, documentary evidence including the medical records and
photographs which have been placed on record by the complainant
clearly depict the deceased in poor health, with medical apparatuses
attached to his body.
10. Given the totality of circumstances, including the alleged
threats extended to the complainant by a gangster coupled with the
potential flight risk posed by the petitioner, who is a resident of the
USA, this Court does not deem it fit to extend the extraordinary
concession of anticipatory bail to her.
11. Accordingly, the instant petition is hereby dismissed.
9 of 10
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:032471
2024:PHHC:032471
CRM-M-4887-2024 (O&M) -10-
12. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
13. However, it is made clear that anything observed
hereinabove shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion on
the merits of the case.
06.03.2024 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL)
Vinay JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:032471
10 of 10
