Allowed¶24

Ajmer Singh v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC18 Jul 2025CRM-M/25213/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CRM-M-25213-2025 | Ajmer Singh v. State of Punjab | High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh | Manjari Nehru Kaul, J. (Oral) | Decision 18.07.2025 | Regular bail under Section 483 BNSS 2023 | FIR No.101 dated 12.04.2022, PS Civil Lines, District Police Commissionerate Amritsar | Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC | cheating, forgery, criminal conspiracy, forged Power of Attorney, impersonation | custody since 02.03.2025 | investigation complete, challan presented | 18 prosecution witnesses | documentary evidence | conspirator only, neither signatory nor purchaser/seller | bail allowed with surety bonds; no opinion on merits; cancellation clause on misuse.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail: petitioner to be admitted to bail on furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

Ajmer Singh Vs State of Punjab — Cheating and Forgery | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Regular bail: petitioner to be admitted to bail on furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

¶24

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner — arrested on 02.03.2025, arraigned only with the aid of Section 120-B IPC, neither signatory nor purchaser/seller of the property per the prosecution case, with investigation complete and challan presented — is entitled to regular bail in FIR No.101 dated 12.04.2022 (Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, Police Station Civil Lines, Amritsar).

¶11

Court's answer

Bail conceded: the petitioner, in custody since 02.03.2025 in a magisterial trial, faces a case resting entirely on documentary evidence already part of the challan, and is only alleged to be a conspirator to the crime in question.

¶21

Ratio / Principle

The instant petition is allowed and the petitioner is to be admitted to bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

¶25

Key takeaways

Anything observed in the order shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.obiter¶25
In case the petitioner misuses the concession of bail granted to him, the State would be at liberty to seek cancellation of the same.obiter¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail — Regular bail granted under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 to petitioner arrested on 02.03.2025 in FIR No.101 dated 12.04.2022, Police Station Civil Lines, District Police Commissionerate Amritsar, under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC (alleged impersonation of complainant; forged Power of Attorney of complainant allegedly made in favour of co-accused Kishore Kumar; accused allegedly attempted to sell complainant's property to one Parveen Singh). Per the prosecution case, petitioner is neither a signatory to the agreement to sell nor purchaser or seller of the property, and is sought to be arraigned only with the aid of Section 120-B IPC; State counsel did not dispute the custody period, completion of investigation, or that position. Investigation qua petitioner complete, challan presented, 18 witnesses cited, trial conclusion remote; entire case against petitioner based on documentary evidence already part of the challan and he is only alleged to be a conspirator. Held, in a magisterial trial with custody since 02.03.2025, further incarceration would serve no useful purpose; bail granted on furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate. Observations not to be construed as an expression of opinion on merits; State at liberty to seek cancellation of bail on misuse.

¶1

211. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

CRM-M-25213-2025 Date of decision: 18.07.2025

¶3

Ajmer Sing h .... Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

State of Pu n jab .... Respondent

¶6

CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

¶7

Present: Mr. Nikhil Ghai, Advocate, an d Mr. Akhil Godara, Advocate, Ms. Malini Singh, Advocate, f o r the petitioner.

¶8

Mr. Shiva Khurmi, AAG, Punj a b, with ASI Balwinder Singh.

¶9

¶10

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL)

¶11

Prayer in this petition filed un d er Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 , is for gran t of regular bail to the petitio n er in case FIR No.101, date d 12.04.2022, under Sections 419, 420, 465 , 467, 468, 471, 120-B of IPC , registered a t Police Station Civil Lines, D istrict Police Commissionerat e Amritsar.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petiti o ner contends that although th e FIR in question came to be registered way b ack on 12.04.2022, it was onl y as recent a s on 02.03.2025 that the petiti o ner was arrested in the instan t case and that too only for allegedly cons p iring with the co-accused, wh o attempted t o impersonate the complainant; t he forged Power of Attorney o f the complai n ant was allegedly made in fav o ur of co-accused, Kishore

¶13

SANJEEV KUMAR 2025.07.18 16:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶14

CRM-M-25213-2025 - 2 -

¶15

Kumar and thereafter, all the accused attempted to sell off the property of the complainant to one Parveen Singh. Learned counsel has asserted that the petitioner is even, as per the case of the prosecution, neither a signatory nor purchaser or seller of the property in question. It has been further submitted that the petitioner is being sought to be arraigned as an accused only with the aid of Section 120-B IPC. It has been further submitted that since the investigation qua the petitioner is complete and challan also stands presented, his further incarceration would serve no useful purpose as the possibility of trial concluding in the near future looks remote with as many as 18 witnesses having been cited by the prosecution.

¶16

Per contra , learned State counsel, while opposing the prayer and submissions made by the counsel opposite, has not disputed the custody period of the petitioner nor has he disputed that the investigation qua him is complete. It has also not been disputed that the petitioner is neither a signatory to the agreement of sell nor purchaser or seller of the property of the complainant. However, it has been asserted that the petitioner along with all the accused had conspired to cheat the complainant on the basis of a fabricated and forged document.

¶17

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material placed on record.

¶18

In a magisterial trial, the petitioner has now been in custody since 02.03.2025. The entire case against the petitioner is based on

¶19

SANJEEV KUMAR 2025.07.18 16:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶20

CRM-M-25213-2025 - 3 -

¶21

documentary evidence which is already part of the challan. The petitioner is only alleged to be a conspirator to the crime in question.

¶22

In the facts and circumstances as enumerated hereinabove, this

¶23

Court deems it fit to extend the concession of bail to the petitioner.

¶24

Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed and the petitioner

¶25

be admitted to bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. 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.

¶26

Needless to add, in case the petitioner misuses the concession

¶27

of bail granted to him, the State would be at liberty to seek cancellation of the same.

¶28

(MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) JUDGE July 18, 2025 sanjeev Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No

¶29

SANJEEV KUMAR 2025.07.18 16:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Ajmer Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajmer Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Binder Alias Bindri Alias Sukhwinder Vs State of Punjab

Gurpreet Singh Alias Logar Vs State of Punjab and Another

Sameer Iqbal Vs State of Haryana

Nitish Kumar Vs State of Punjab

Jagdish Vs State of Haryana and Another

Vishal Kumar Vs State of Punjab