Jitender Alias Challa vs State Of Haryana
2026 Latest Caselaw 1196 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Jitender Alias Challa vs State Of Haryana on 9 February, 2026

CRM-M--66363-2025                          -11-

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                         CHANDIGARH


241                                               CRM-M-66363-2025
                                                  Date of Decision: 09.02.202
                                                                         .2026

Jitender Alias Challa
                                                              ...Petitioner.
       v.

State of Haryana
                                                              ...Respondent.


CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE AARADHNA SAWHNEY
                                    SAWHNEY.


Present:      Mr. Jitender Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

              Mr. Vishal Singh, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana.

                     ****

AARADHNA SAWHNEY, J. (Oral)

1. By virtue of the present petition under Section 483 BNSS,

petitioner, an accused in case bearing FIR No.9 dated 07.01.2025 registered

against him, for commission of offences punishable under Sections 419, 420,

467, 468, 471, 120-B 120 IPC, at Police Station Civil Lines, Hisar, has prayed

for grant rant of bail.

2. Relevant facts as emerging from documents on record be

noticed hereinbelow:-

hereinbelow:

Pursuant to the orders received from the Court of learned

Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar, criminal proceedings vide above FIR were

initiated.

In brief, thee contents of the order are as follows:

follows:-

That one Ravi (co-accused) accused) had furnished bail/surety bonds.

Arjun son of Pali had appeared as surety for Ravi and had also

1 of 6

furnished his Aadhar Card along with jamabandi etc. The

aforesaid Ravi did not appear in th thee Court. Resultantly, his bail

was cancelled. Notice to surety was issued. In pursuance to the

said notice, some another person appeared in the Court,

introduced himself as Arjun son of Pali and moved an

application pointing therein that infact Rajesh Kuma Kumarr son of

Lakhi, resident of Uklana, had appeared as surety for Ravi and

had produced forged Aadhar Card. The aforesaid Rajesh had

impersonated him (Arjun) and had also furnished jamabandi of

his land.

On the basis of these forged documents Ravi, who was in i

custody in case bearing FIR No.113 of 2023 under Sections

147, 323, 332, 353, 307 IPC was released on bail. On the

receipt of this application, the Court directed to lodge the FIR.

Accordingly, FIR No.0009 dated 07.01.2025 was registered

against Ravi and a others under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120 120-B B IPC.

During the course of investigation, all the documents, as in, bail application,

power of attorney, surety bonds, copy of Jamabandi etc. were taken into

possession.

ossession. Arjun, son of Pali Ram, who had moved the application before

the Court and his identifier Naresh Kumar son of Parbhati Ram were also

joined the investigation. During the investigation, it came to the notice of the

investigating agency that in order to get Ravi released on bail, Vinod Vinod, son on of

Prithvi in conspiracy with the others namely Jitender @ Challa (present

petitioner), Rajesh @ Raja, Naresh Kumar had prepared the forged Aadhar petitioner),

Card of Arjun son of Pali Ram, resident of Uklana, by affixing photo of co-

co

accused Rajesh son of Lakhi Ram, Ram, meaning thereby that Rajesh son of Lakhi

2 of 6

Ram had appeared as Arjun son of Pali Ram and had stood surety for Ravi.

The aforesaid co-accused co accused Rajesh was identified by co co-accused accused Naresh

Kumar. It also came to the notice of the IO that ID card issued by the

Development evelopment and Panchayats Department, in favour of Arjun son of Pali

Ram, had also been forged by Vinod etc. to create fake documents.

On 14.01.2025, co-accused accused Vinod, Rajesh @ Raja, petitioner-

petitioner

Jitender @ Challa Cha la and Naresh were arrested. On 16.01.2025, cco-accused accused

Ravi was also arrested.

During the course of interrogation, petitioner confessed to his

involvement in the commission of offences and elaborated upon the manner

in which this fraud played on the Court, was committed committed.. Roles played by

each of the accused were also elaborated upon.

Aggrieved of the order dated 3.11.2025 .2025 passed by learned

Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar vide which bail application of petitioner

was dismissed, the present petition has been filed.

3. Learned counsel contends that petitioner has been falsely

implicated. No direct or corroborative incriminating material was collected

by the IO, during the course of investigation, to connect petitioner with the

offence. He has been arrayed as accused only on the basis of hearsay and

unverified allegations of the other co-accused, co accused, whose disclosure statements

were recorded at one point in time. No mobile phone, computer printer etc.

were taken into possession by the IO, which could even remotely suggest

involvement of the petitioner in preparing forged documents documents.

Learned counsel further contends that co co-accused accused Ravi and

Naresh have since been extended the concession of bail by the Coordinate

Bench of this Court, vide orders dated 29.07.2025 and 03.07.2025 passed in

3 of 6

CRM-M-39369 39369-2025 and CRM-M-31067 31067-2025, 2025, respectively, thus, similar

treatment be meted out to petitioner, who has been in custody since

14.01.2025, moreso when challan has been filed and completion of trial

(offences being magisterial triable) is likely to take some time. F Further urther

incarceration of petitioner, as per learned counsel, would not serve any

useful purpose.

4. Status report by way of affidavit of Kamaljeet Singh, HPS,

Deputy Superintendent of Police, HQ, Hisar has been filed. In para 7

thereof, the role played by the petitioner has been highlighted, as being the

person who prepared forged Aadhar Card of Arjun, thus, facilitating the

commission of offence. For the said purpose, he used his mobile phone

handset which he got recovered.

5. Both the counsel have been heard and documents on record

have been perused.

6. Before expressing any opinion on the merits of submission

advanced by both the learned counsel, it would not be out of place to

mention here that Hon'ble Supreme Court while taking cognizance of the th

menace of impersonation of sureties in Petition(s) for Special Leave to

Appeal (Crl.) No(s).4116/2021 titled as Rajesh Kumar Rathore vs. The

State of Chhatisgarh issued notice to UIDAI to explore the feasibility of

evolving mechanism to verify genuinenes genuineness of the surety.

Imposing condition of furnishing surety bonds along with

personal bonds, while allowing the bail application of any accused is

primarily to ensure the presence of the accused during the trial. Furnishing

fake surety bonds not only tempers tempers with the process of justice but also

4 of 6

erodes public confidence in criminal justice dispensation system and is in

fact a fraud on the Court.

In so far as the case in hand is concerned, from the documents

and connecting circumstances brought on record, it is quite apparent that the

entire incident was committed with a pre-

pre-mediated mediated mind, it didn't happen at

the spur of the moment. It can further be inferred that petitioner was

approached by a friend of co-accused co accused Ravi, who was already in custody in

case bearing FIR No.113 of 2023 under Sections 147, 323, 332, 353, 307

IPC. This friend of co-accused co Ravi requested Vinod to arrange for surety.

That is when the other co-accused co accused came into picture. Co Co-accused accused Rajesh in

conspiracy racy with petitioner and other co-accused, accused, forged Aadhar Card of his

cousin brother Arjun, by affixing his own photograph on the said Aadhar

Card. Even the ID Card issued by Panchayats Development Department in

favour of Arjun was forged. To prove solvency solvency,, revenue record of Arjun was

also appended along with the surety bonds. The mobile phone through which

the original documents were sent on 'Whatsapp' by the accused to each

other, to prepare forged documents was also taken into possession.

Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that co co-accused accused

Naresh Kumar and Ravi, who have been granted the concession of bail by

the Coordinate Bench of this Court, are similarly situated as the present

petitioner, thus similar treatment be meted out to him, has not found favour

with the Court, for the reason that documents and other connecting

circumstances brought on record, clearly suggest that petitioner played a

constructive role in facilitating the offence by preparing the forged Aadhar

Card of Arjun through through his mobile phone. Simply because petitioner has been

in custody since 14.01.2025, cannot be a ground, at this stage, to grant him

5 of 6

the concession of bail, for if released on bail, there is every likelihood of him

fleeing from the process of justice by not appearing in the Court and

committing the same offence yet again.

7. In view of the discussion made hereinabove, the present

petition is hereby dismissed. Learned trial Court is directed to make sincere

efforts to expeditiously dispose of the case.

(AARADHNA AARADHNA SAWHNEY) SAWHNEY 09.02.2026 JUDGE gbs

Whether Speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No

6 of 6