[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sarabjit Kaur vs State Of Punjab on 9 March, 2026
CRM-M-66240-2025 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Sr. No.107
CRM-M-66240-2025
Date of Decision:09.03.2026
SARABJIT KAUR ...Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB ....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU
Present:- Mr. Nippun Sharma, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Sahil Chowdhary, AAG, Punjab.
*****
MANDEEP PANNU, J. (Oral)
1. This is the first criminal miscellaneous petition under Section
482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking the concession
of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 0032 dated 08.04.2021
registered under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 471 read with Section 120-B
of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Navi Baradari, District
Jalandhar, Punjab.
2. Briefly stated, the present FIR has been registered on the
complaint of Balbir Kaur wife of Gurdial Singh, an NRI, alleging that she is
the owner of about 180 marlas of land situated at Krishanpura near Ajit
Nagar, Bajria. It is alleged that the complainant came to know through her
acquaintance Sukhwant Singh that one Simranjit Singh had paid earnest
money through cheques for purchase of the said property, though the
complainant had neither agreed to sell the said land nor had she received any
ANU
2026.03.09 17:48
I am the author of this document
Chandigarh
such payment. Upon inquiry, it surfaced that during the time when the
complainant was residing in America, Narinder Singh had arranged a lady
who impersonated the complainant Balbir Kaur and on the basis of a forged
general power of attorney dated 01.06.2020 got the land sold in favour of
Sunita Duggal for a sum of ₹33 lakhs. It is further alleged that the said
power of attorney was attested with the involvement of other accused
persons and thereafter the property was fraudulently transferred. According
to the prosecution, the present petitioner Sarabjit Kaur, along with co-
accused including Narinder Singh @ Nindi and others, was part of the
conspiracy and facilitated the execution of the forged documents and illegal
sale of the property. On the basis of these allegations, the present FIR has
been registered against the accused persons under Sections 419, 420, 465,
467, 471 and 120-B of the IPC.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the
petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It
is argued that the petitioner has not been named in the FIR and no specific
overt act or role has been attributed to her. Neither the alleged power of
attorney nor the sale deed bears the signatures of the petitioner in any
capacity. It is further submitted that as per the prosecution version, the main
allegations are against Narinder Singh, husband of the petitioner, who
allegedly arranged a lady to impersonate the complainant Balbir Kaur for
execution of the forged documents, and the said impersonating lady Gurjeet
Kaur has already been arrested by the police. Learned counsel submits that
merely because the petitioner is the wife of the co-accused Narinder Singh,
ANU
2026.03.09 17:48
I am the author of this document
Chandigarh
she is being unnecessarily harassed by the investigating agency. It is further
argued that the petitioner is a household woman with clean antecedents and
is not involved in any other criminal case. The petitioner is ready and willing
to join the investigation and has also expressed her readiness to give her
specimen signatures and thumb impressions for comparison by the
handwriting expert and FSL. It is contended that no recovery is to be
effected from the petitioner and her custodial interrogation is not required.
On these grounds, prayer has been made for grant of anticipatory bail to the
petitioner.
4. Learned State counsel has opposed the present petition and
submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature and
pertain to a well-planned conspiracy involving impersonation, forgery and
fraudulent transfer of immovable property. It is argued that the investigation
conducted so far has revealed that the present petitioner Sarabjit Kaur was
actively involved in the commission of the offence. As per the prosecution
case, the petitioner impersonated the complainant Balbir Kaur and executed
documents in furtherance of the conspiracy whereby a forged power of
attorney was prepared in favour of her husband Narinder Singh and
thereafter the property belonging to the complainant was fraudulently sold.
Learned State counsel submits that the material collected during
investigation indicates that the petitioner had played a pivotal role in
facilitating the impersonation and execution of forged documents, which
ultimately resulted in wrongful loss to the complainant. It is further
contended that the investigation is still at a crucial stage and the custodial
ANU
2026.03.09 17:48
I am the author of this document
Chandigarh
interrogation of the petitioner is necessary for effective investigation,
particularly to ascertain her precise role in arranging the impersonator,
facilitating the forged power of attorney and participating in the illegal
property transaction. It is also submitted that the custodial interrogation of
the petitioner would be necessary to confront her with the co-accused and to
recover relevant documents and digital evidence pertaining to the forged
property transaction and to unearth the full extent of the conspiracy. Learned
State counsel has further submitted that if the petitioner is granted
anticipatory bail at this stage, it may adversely affect the investigation and
there is a likelihood that she may influence or intimidate material witnesses.
On these grounds, prayer has been made for dismissal of the present petition.
5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the
record, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner is not entitled
to the concession of anticipatory bail. The allegations in the present case
pertain to a serious offence involving impersonation and fabrication of
documents in respect of valuable immovable property belonging to the
complainant. As per the prosecution case, while the complainant was
residing abroad, the accused persons conspired to prepare a forged power of
attorney by impersonating the complainant and on the basis of the said
forged document, the property in question was fraudulently sold. The role
attributed to the present petitioner is not merely peripheral but specific in
nature. The investigation suggests that the petitioner impersonated the
complainant Balbir Kaur and participated in the preparation of the forged
power of attorney in favour of her husband Narinder Singh, which
ANU
2026.03.09 17:48
I am the author of this document
Chandigarh
subsequently facilitated the illegal transfer of the complainant's property.
Such allegations disclose a deliberate and calculated act of fraud and forgery
causing substantial loss to the complainant.
6. It is also pertinent to note that the investigation is still underway
and the matter involves multiple accused persons and forged documents. The
custodial interrogation of the petitioner appears to be necessary for effective
investigation, particularly for confronting her with the co-accused, verifying
the circumstances surrounding the impersonation and forged documents and
for recovery of relevant material evidence connected with the fraudulent
transaction. At this stage, when the investigation is continuing and the
prosecution case involves serious allegations of conspiracy, forgery and
cheating in relation to immovable property, this Court does not find it
appropriate to extend the extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail to the
petitioner. Moreover, the material witnesses in the case are yet to be
examined and the possibility of the petitioner influencing or interfering with
the investigation cannot be ruled out if she is granted the concession of pre-
arrest bail.
7. Considering the gravity of the allegations, the specific role
attributed to the petitioner in impersonating the complainant and facilitating
the forged power of attorney and the stage of investigation, this Court is of
the view that no ground is made out for grant of anticipatory bail.
Consequently, the present petition filed by the petitioner Sarabjit Kaur is
dismissed.
ANU
2026.03.09 17:48
I am the author of this document
Chandigarh
8. However, nothing observed herein shall be construed as an
expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
9. All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(MANDEEP PANNU)
09.03.2026 JUDGE
Anu
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
ANU
2026.03.09 17:48
I am the author of this document
Chandigarh
