Jagtar Singh Vs State of Punjab

The prayer in the present petition under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 is for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.0030 dated 16.02.2026 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, 1860 (Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61 of BNS, 2023) at Police Station Central Sector 17, U.T., Chandigarh.

¶17

A reply dated 08.05.2026 has been filed on behalf of the petitioner by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The same is taken on record.

¶18

JITESH LAL 2026.07.21 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶19

CRM-M-26710-2026

¶20

-2-

¶21

The present FIR came to be registered at the instance of Taranjot Kaur D/o late Sh. Hardial Singh Sekhon and the same reads as under:-

¶22

Sir, It is requested that one complaint No.ICMS/2025/043444 dated 19/12/2025 filed by Taranjot Kaur D/o Late Sh.Hardial Singh Sekhon, resident of H.No.2792, Sector-7, Sector 62, SAS Nagar, Pb. Against Jagtar Singh and etc. was investigated by Police Station, which is as follows:- To 1.the senior superintendent of Police, Chandigarh. 2.The Station House Officer, Police Station, Sector 3, Chandigarh. Sub:Complaint against accused persons namely (1) Jagtar Singh aged about 57 years S/o Sh. Amar Singh R/o House No. 276, Darshan Avenue, Sultanwind, Amritsar (Pb.), Aadhaar Card No. 6772-6158-4039, Mobile No. 99148-14863 and impersonator (2) Taranjot Kaur R/o House No.579, Garden Enclave, GT Road, Bypass, Amritsar and all the persons who are involved in the fraud and producing false documents pertaining to House No. 53, Sector 8-A, Chandigarh in the Court under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B along with other relevant Sections of IPC and BNS 2023. Sir, 1.That the above said complaint is being filed by Taranjot Kaur D/o late Sh. Hardial Singh Sekhon and legal heir of late Smt. Gurdip Kaur R/o House No. 2792, Phase-7, Sector 62, SAS Nagar, Mohali. 2. That case pertains to the fraud committed pertaining House No.53, Sector 8-A, Chandigarh. 3. That the applicant came to know about the case titled as Jagtar Singh Vs. Gurdeep Kaur and another was filed by Jagtar Singh when the applicant went to Estate Office, U.T. Chandigarh on 21.04.2025 along with her Advocate namely Ms. Reeta Shinghari where some unknown persons and property dealers were there to inspect the same file and informed the applicant that Sh. Jagtar Singh had already

¶23

JITESH LAL 2026.07.21 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶24

CRM-M-26710-2026

¶25

-3-

¶26

purchased the above said property from the mother of the applicant Smt. Gurdip Kaur. The applicant was given the photocopy of the civil suit filed by the Jagtar Singh and the applicant was asked to sell the above said property to Jagtar Singh or to face dire consequences. Thus, the applicant came to know that some unknown person using forged documents and filed a civil suit before Dr. Parikshit Sharma, Civil Judge (Junior Division), Chandigarh, to grab the property of the applicant. The copy of the civil suit along with the annexures are enclosed as Annexure A-1/1. 4. That some lady impersonator as Taranjot Kaur has also submitted some documents before the Estate Officer, U.T. Chandigarh in the year 2019 pertaining to the transfer of the above said property where the above said impersonator Taranjot Kaur shown her address as R/o House No. 579, Garden Enclave, GT Road, Bypass, Amritsar. It is worth mentioning here the plaintiff Jagtar Singh has also shown his address as House No. 276, Darshan Avenue, Sultanwind, Amritsar, Punjab. This shows that Jagtar Singh and impersonator Taranjot Kaur who has given her address in the Estate Office, U.T. Chandigarh as R/o Amritsar as mentioned above is having connivance with Jagtar Singh to grab the property of the applicant Taranjot Kaur. The applicant immediately filed an application before the Estate Officer, U.T. Chandigarh on 21.04.2025 informing that some fraud is being committed as the applicant along with her brother has already applied for the transfer of said property in their names being the legal heirs of Smt. Gurdip Kaur W/o Sh. Hardial Singh Sekhon but the property was not transferred as in the website it was being shown as resumed and in the year 2025 the website was updated and the resumption order has been set aside by the Estate Officer, U.T. Chandigarh. The applicant also informed the Estate Officer, U.T. Chandigarh that her brother has already expired, so the applicant was informed that the fresh

¶27

JITESH LAL 2026.07.21 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶28

CRM-M-26710-2026

¶29

-4-

¶30

application for the transfer has to be submitted. The applicant requested the E.O., U.T. Chandigarh not to supply any documents to any person except the applicant and not to allow any person to check and inspect the file. The file was immediately ordered to be sealed by the Estate Officer, U.T. Chandigarh. The application dated 21.04.2025 moved by the applicant before the Estate Officer, U.T. Chandigarh is enclosed as Annexure A-1. 5. That the House No. 53, Sector 8-A, Chandigarh was originally allotted in the name of Smt. Varyam Kaur W/o Sh. Hardial Singh Guram and after death of late Smt. Varyam Kaur on 08.12.1996 the above said property was transferred in favour of her daughter Smt. Gurdip Kaur. 6. That Smt. Gurdip Kaur was posted as IAS Officer in various capacities in the State of Punjab and she retired on 31.01.1996 from the post of Chairperson of School and Colleges Tribunal. 7. That applicant father, namely Sh. Hardial Singh Sekhon was an IPS Officer and late Sh. Hardial Singh Sekhon expired during service. The applicant father was lastly posted as Inspector General of Police, Computerization, in Chandigarh. 8. That the above said property was transferred in favour of Mrs. Gurdip Kaur Sekhon wife of late Sh. Hardial Singh Sekhon. The copy of the transfer letter dated 24.01.1997 is enclosed as Annexure A/2. 9. That Mrs. Gurdip Kaur W/o Sh. Hardial Singh Sekhon expired on 22.11.2001. The copy of the death certificate of late Smt. Gurdip Kaur is enclosed as Annexure A-3. 10. That late Smt. Gurdip Kaur has two legal heirs i.e. applicant Ms. Taranjot Kaur D/o late Sh. Hardial Singh Sekhon and late Sh. Lajeshwar Singh, who has already expired on 13.07.2023. The copy of the death certificate of late Sh. Lajeshwar Singh is enclosed as Annexure A-4. 11. That late Sh. Lajeshwar Singh has following legal heirs: a. Navdeep Kaur (wife) b. Eveleen Kaur (daughter) 12. That the applicant along with her said brother applied for the transfer of property in their

¶31

JITESH LAL 2026.07.21 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶32

CRM-M-26710-2026

¶33

-5-

¶34

names vide application No. 119703 dated 20.02.2013. The copy of the application No. 119703 dated 20.02.2013 is enclosed as Annexure A-5. 13. That the address of the applicant has been wrongly given by Jagtar Singh as R/o House No. 53, Sector 8-A, Chandigarh as Mrs. Gurdip Kaur through legal heir Taranjot Kaur, as the above said house has already been rented out to the Government Department i.e. Food Corporation of India which has been let out by the grandmother of the applicant namely Smt. Varyam Kaur since the year 1985 and till date Food Corporation of India is in the possession of the tenanted premises. The applicant is residing at House No. 2792, Phase-7, Sector 61, SAS Nagar, Mohali, Punjab from the last 27 years. 14. That the applicant is placing on record the lease agreement executed with Food Corporation of India dated 15.10.1985 between Smt. Varyam Kaur, Court Guardian of Ms. Taranjot Kaur (applicant) with Food Corporation of India. The copy of the lease agreement dated 15.10.1985 is enclosed as Annexure A-6. 15. That when the summons were sent to the applicant they were never received and summons were received back unserved as the applicant in question was never residing in the above said house. 16. That the plaintiff in order to play the fraud informed the court that defendant No.1 late Smt. Gurdip Kaur since deceased has expired, was impleaded through her sole legal heir namely impersonator Taranjot Kaur and the said impersonator Taranjot Kaur had already expired on 17.10.2024 and also informed that Taranjot Kaur does not have any legal heirs and placed on record the copy of the death certificate dated 16.11.2024 of the impersonator Taranjot Kaur. The copy of the zimni order dated 29.01.2025 is enclosed as Annexure A-7. Thereafter, the case was adjourned to 07.04.2025. 17. That copy of the death certificate of impersonator Taranjot Kaur dated 17.10.2024 is enclosed as Annexure A-8 where the address of impersonator

¶35

JITESH LAL 2026.07.21 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶36

CRM-M-26710-2026

¶37

-6-

¶38

Taranjot Kaur has been shown as House No. 856, Lalheri Road, Hardev Nagar, Khanna, Ludhiana. 18. That Jagtar Singh has committed a fraud which is very much clear that at the time of filing of the case address of the Taranjot Kaur has been mentioned as House No. 53, Sector 8-A. Chandigarh and while producing the death certificate of impersonator Taranjot Kaur where the permanent address has been mentioned as House No.205, Tehsil Khanna, District Ludhiana. This clearly shows that heinous crime has been committed by the Jagtar Singh in order to grab the property of the applicant Taranjot Kaur. 19. That applicant is also placing on record photocopy of attested copy of her affidavit dated 03.06.2015 where it has been mentioned that the applicant is also known by the name Slony Taranjot Kaur daughter of Sh. Hardial Singh R/o House No. 2792, Phase-7, Mohali. It has also been mentioned that Slony Taranjot Kaur and Taranjot Kaur is one and the same person. The copy of the affidavit dated 03.06.2015 attested before Executive Magistrate, District SAS Nagar, Mohali is enclosed as Annexure A-9. 20. That the applicant is placing on record her copy of Aadhaar Card where it has been categorically mentioned D/o Sh. Hardial Singh R/o House No. 2792, Phase-7, Sector 61, SAS Nagar, Mohali, Punjab and the date of birth of the applicant has been shown as 26.09.1973. The copy of Aadhaar Card of the applicant Taranjot Kaur is enclosed as Annexure A-10. The copy of the PAN card of applicant Taranjot Kaur is enclosed as Annexure A-11. The copy of the driving license of applicant Taranjot Kaur is enclosed as Annexure A-12. The copy of the Voter Identity Card of applicant Taranjot Kaur is enclosed as Annexure A-13. 21. That applicant is also placing on record copy of her Passport dated 17.08.1987 where the name of the applicant has been mentioned as Slony Taranjot Kaur and father name has been mentioned as Hardial Singh and mother name has

¶39

JITESH LAL 2026.07.21 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶40

CRM-M-26710-2026

¶41

-7-

¶42

been mentioned as G.K. Sekhon and address has been mentioned as R/o House No. 53, Sector 8-A, Chandigarh and in the column particulars of relative/friend to be intimated in event of death or accident has been mentioned as G.K. Sekhon, House No. 53, Sector 8, Chandigarh. The copy of the passport dated 17.08.1987 of applicant Slony Taranjot Kaur @Taranjot Kaur is enclosed as Annexure A-14. 22. That applicant is also placing on record copy of Passport dated 24.08.1987 of her mother Smt. Gurdip Kaur Sekhon where the husband's name of Smt. Gurdip Kaur Sekhon has been shown as Sardar Hardial Singh and address has been shown as House No. 53, Sector 8-A, Chandigarh. The copy of the passport dated 24.08.1987 of late Smt. Gurdip Kaur Sekhon mother of applicant Taranjot Kaur is enclosed as Annexure A-15. 23. That applicant Taranjot Kaur has done her graduation from Stanford University, USA. Now, the applicant Taranjot Kaur is presently posted in the Government Department as Deputy Manager, Director General School Education, Punjab located at Phase-VIII, Mohali. The certificate of Matriculation of Taranjot Kaur dated March 1988 is enclosed as Annexure A-16. The Bachelor Degree in Arts and Communication of the applicant Taranjot Kaur is enclosed as Annexure A-17. 24. That applicant is also placing on record Passport dated 17.08.1987 of late Sh. Lajeshwar Singh, brother of applicant Taranjot Kaur. In the said passport, father name has been mentioned as Hardial Singh and mother name has been mentioned as G.K. Sekhon and Permanent Address has been mentioned as House No. 53, Sector 8-A, Chandigarh. The copy of the passport dated 17.08.1987 of late Sh. Lajeshwar Singh brother of applicant Taranjot Kaur is enclosed as Annexure A-18. 25. That applicant is also placing on record Aadhaar Card of her brother Lajeshwar Singh S/o Sh. Hardial Singh where the address of late Lajeshwar Singh has been mentioned as

¶43

JITESH LAL 2026.07.21 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶44

CRM-M-26710-2026

¶45

-8-

¶46

House No. 2792, Phase-7, Sector 61, SAS Nagar Mohali. The copy of the Aadhaar Card, PAN card and Voter ID Card of Lajeshwar Singh brother of applicant Taranjot Kaur are enclosed as Annexure A-19 (Colly). The copy of the Aadhaar Card of Navdeep Kaur (wife of late Lajeshwar Singh) and Aadhaar Card of Eveleen Kaur Sekhon (daughter of late Lajeshwar Singh) are enclosed as Annexure A-20 (Colly). 26. The applicant is also placing on record photograph of her father late Sh. Hardial Singh Sekhon, IPS in uniform. Photograph of mother along with family photographs of brother and sister and grandmother is enclosed as Annexure A-21. 27. That applicant is also placing on record the death certificate of her grandmother Smt. Varyam Kaur where the husband name has been mentioned as Hardial Singh Guram where date of death is showing as 08.12.1996. The copy of the death certificate of late Smt. Varyam Kaur is enclosed as Annexure A-22. Thus, it is not possible that Smt. Varyam Kaur had signed agreement to sell dated 14.03.1999 and its receipt dated 01.01.2000, receipt dated 08.12.2000 and payment receipt dated 08.01.2001 Annexure A-1 (Colly) with the suit filed by Jagtar Singh as Smt. Varyam Kaur has already expired on 08.12.1996. This clearly shows that a fraud has been committed by Jagtar Singh. That applicant is also placing on record the death certificate of her grandfather Hardial Singh S/o Sh. Narain Singh and the date of death is shown as 11.09.1982 and address of her grandfather has been shown as House No. 53, Sector 8-A, Chandigarh. The copy of the death certificate of late grandfather of applicant Taranjot Kaur namely Hardial Singh 5/o Sh. Narain Singh is enclosed as Annexure A-23. 29. That applicant is also placing on record death certificate of her father H.S. Sekhon S/o Sh. Gopal Singh and date of death is shown as 08.06.1986. The copy of the death certificate of father of applicant Taranjot Kaur namely H.S. Sekhon S/o Sh. Gopal Singh is enclosed as

¶47

JITESH LAL 2026.07.21 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶48

CRM-M-26710-2026

¶49

-9-

¶50

Annexure A-24. 30. That the applicant is also submitting the photocopy of her passport issued on 22.01.1997 which expired on 21.01.2017. The photocopy of the passport of applicant Slony Taranjot Kaur dated 22.01.1997 is enclosed as Annexure A-25. 31. That earlier applicant was residing with her parents at House No. 53, Sector 5, Chandigarh ie. House allotted by the Government of Punjab, Chandigarh when her mother was posted as an IAS Officer. It is worth mentioning here that Smt. Gurdip Kaur was residing in the above said house for the last 17 years till her retirement. 32. That applicant went to the USA in the year 1992 and then again returned back in the year 1993 as her grandmother was unwell and after her death in the year 1996 the applicant again went to USA in the year 1998. The applicant returned to India in the month of October 2001 from USA after the terrorist attack of 9/11 in USA. 33. That it is worth mentioning here that one lady alleged to be Taranjot Kaur and alleged to be D/o Sh. Hardial Singh Sekhon has filed an application in the Estate Officer, U.T. Chandigarh in the year 2019 requesting to transfer the property in her name. 34. That this clearly shows that applicant Taranjot Kaur is the real daughter of late Smt. Gurdip Kaur and forgery has been committed by Jagtar Singh and his associates by filing the frivolous suit before this Hon'ble Court on the basis of forged sale agreement. 35.That this clearly shows that a heinous crime has been committed by the plaintiff by way of impersonation by producing the death certificate of some other Taranjot Kaur having address i.e. House No. 856, Lalheri Road Hardev Nagar Khanna, Ludhiana and given the statement in the Hon'ble Court that Taranjot Kaur had already expired and having no other legal heir and also produced forged agreement to sell alleged to be executed by the mother of the applicant Smt. Gurdip Kaur and further agreement alleged to be executed by applicant Taranjot Kaur.

¶51

JITESH LAL 2026.07.21 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶52

CRM-M-26710-2026

¶53

-10-

¶54

It is further respectfully submitted here that the plaintiff has also got filed application by some other impersonator Taranjot Kaur in the year 2019 having address in Amritsar. Thus, all these persons have committed fraud with the Court as well as with the applicant by producing false and fabricated documents in the Court also by way of fraud, by impersonating some other person as Taranjot Kaur. Thus, Jagtar Singh has hatched criminal conspiracy. Thus, from all the facts, it is crystal clear that false agreement to sell and receipts have been executed by Jagtar Singh just to grab the property and also by producing some unknown person as Taranjot Kaur. 36. That it is worth mentioning here that Aadhaar Card of the lady alleged to be Taranjot Kaur has been attached in the Estate Officer, U.T. Chandigarh which shows that her year of birth is 1945 which is not possible as father of original Taranjot Kaur, DOB was 15.03.1937. It is not possible that father of the applicant was 08 years old when alleged Taranjot Kaur was born. 37. That Jagtar Singh has not mentioned the mother's name of impersonator Taranjot Kaur to prove her identity. It is worth mentioning here that when the civil suit has been filed by Sh. Jagtar Singh where they have shown that Taranjot Kaur has expired and mentioned that she was not having any legal heirs so the property should be decreed in their favour. This clearly shows that Jagtar Singh and her impersonator lady alleged to be Taranjot Kaur has played a fraud with the court also as well as with the Government Office ie. Estate Officer, U.T. Chandigarh to grab the property of the applicant and address of both the persons have been mentioned as resident of Amritsar. 38. That Sh. Jagtar Singh has very cleverly manipulated the things and has wrongly mentioned in the court that impersonator Taranjot Kaur has expired and having no legal heirs so the above said property should be transferred in his name on the basis of the forged documents.

¶55

JITESH LAL 2026.07.21 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶56

CRM-M-26710-2026

¶57

-11-

¶58

39. That no document has been produced by impersonator Taranjot Kaur as well as Jagtar Singh showing that alleged Taranjot Kaur was the daughter of Gurdip Kaur and granddaughter of Varyam Kaur. 40. That the applicant is also placing on record the decision on LPA No. 646 of 1989, in which Smt. Kartar Kaur widow of Sh. Gopal Singh, i.e. Dadi ji and Sh. Iqbal Singh S/o Sh. Gopal Singh, i.e. Tayaji of the applicant, filed case against mother of the applicant Smt. Gurdip Kaur Sekhon, Rajashwar Singh (brother) and applicant Taranjot Kaur (minor) through Smt. Varyam Kaur, her grandmother (Respondents). Case pertained to the intense dispute of the Will of Sh. Hardial Singh Sekhon (father of the applicant), which was decided in favour of the respondents Gurdip Kaur Sekhon and others. The copy of the order dated 03.07.2009 passed in LPA No. 646 of 1989 in case titled as Kartar Kaur and another Vs. Gurdeep Kaur Sekhon & others is enclosed as Annexure A-26. 41. That applicant Taranjot Kaur is having the apprehension that her Tayaji's son namely Khushpal Singh @ Lali S/o Sh. Iqbal Singh Sekhon R/o Wadala House, Azad Nagar, G.T. Road, Amritsar is behind the fraud committed by Jagtar Singh and other persons, as Sh. Khushpal Singh @ Lali earlier also has been threatening the applicant and her family with dire consequences for the past many years, with the objective of forcing her to transfer in his name the ancestral properties located at Amritsar, which were left behind by the applicant Taranjot Kaur's father. So much so that the applicant and her family did not visit their ancestral home and land located at Amritsar for past many years out of fear and threat from Khushpal Singh S/o Iqbal Singh Sekhon and his partners. It is worth mentioning here that the applicant's family is being harassed since the LPA No. 646 of 1989 titled as Kartar Kaur and others Vs. Gurdip Kaur Sekhon was filed, and the harassment increased when the case was decided on

¶59

JITESH LAL 2026.07.21 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶60

CRM-M-26710-2026

¶61

-12-

¶62

03.07.2009 in favour of the applicant and against Smt. Kartar Kaur and Iqbal Singh, Le. Dadi ji and Taya ji of the applicant Taranjot Kaur. 42. That applicant Taranjot Kaur and her family are also having threat to their lives as the applicant was threatened by Khushpal Singh @ Lali and his two sons and wife. Applicant has the apprehension that Jagtar Singh is a front-man working at the behest of Khushpal Singh @ Lali. It is also pointed out that if anything happens to the applicant or her family, then all these persons and other persons involved in the present fraud will be solely responsible for the same. 43 That Jagtar Singh along with connivance of all above persons has submitted fabricated documents before the Court of Dr. Parikshit Sharma, Civil Judge (Junior Division), Chandigarh, where the forged signatures of Smt. Gurdip Kaur, Smt.Taranjot Kaur (applicant) and grandmother of applicant Smt. Varyam Kaur, are placed on the alleged to be executed agreement to sell and on the alleged receipts, whereas the various documents produced by the applicant Taranjot Kaur show that the actual signatures of Smt. Gurdip Kaur and applicant Taranjot Kaur are entirely different. Moreover, Smt. Varyam Kaur had already expired on 08.12.1996. This clearly shows that a fraud has been committed by Jagtar Singh as he produced the forged documents before the Court in order to grab the property of the applicant and also filed false and fabricated documents before the Estate Officer, U.T. Chandigarh pertaining to the above said property alleging that the above said property has been purchased by Jagtar Singh. 44. That thumb impression of Taranjot Kaur has been appended on the alleged agreement to sell and whereas applicant Taranjot Kaur used to sign the documents and her signature has been mentioned in various documents produced before the Court of Dr. Parikshit Sharma, Civil Judge (Junior Division), Chandigarh. This clearly shows that applicant Taranjot Kaur used to sign

¶63

JITESH LAL 2026.07.21 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶64

CRM-M-26710-2026

¶65

-13-

¶66

with her signatures. Moreover, it is crystal clear that when the alleged agreement to sell produced by Jagtar Singh in the Court was signed dated 14.03.1999, the applicant Taranjot Kaur was in USA for higher studies and living at Stanford University, California. Moreover, when the alleged receipts were signed as a witness by the applicant Taranjot Kaur on 01.01.2000 and 08.12.2000 and 08.01.2001, the applicant Taranjot Kaur was not in India as she was pursuing her graduation degree in Stanford University, USA. Moreover, Smt. Varyam Kaur had already expired on 08.12.1996, so it is not possible for Smt. Varyam Kaur to sign as a witness on 14.03.1999, 01.01.2000, 08.12.2000 and on 08.01.2001. 45. That the DL of applicant Taranjot Kaur is also enclosed, where her signatures can be seen. Applicant Taranjot Kaur used to sign in full signatures and never imposed thumb impression, and the signatures of her mother Gurdip Kaur Sekhon were also forged in the alleged document as the original signatures of Smt. Gurdip Kaur Sekhon are visible in her passport. Moreover, there are thousands of documents where mother of the applicant late Smt. Gurdip Kaur Sekhon signed in her capacity as an IAS Officer in different departments wherever she was posted. 46. That it is worth mentioning here that the alleged agreement to sell is alleged to be executed on 14.03.1999 and the present suit has been filed on 21.11.2023 i.e. after a gap of 23 years. Moreover, it is not possible that Rs. 1,35,00,000/- alleged to be paid to late Smt. Gurdip Kaur (mother of the applicant Taranjot Kaur) and to the applicant was given totally in cash and Jagtar Singh has not produced any document to prove the transactions. 47. Applicant also has the apprehension that Khushpal Singh, Jagtar Singh and others have fraudulently obtained the personal identity documents of applicant Taranjot Kaur, i.e. Aadhaar card, PAN card, etc. from some sources and are in the process of misusing the same to grab

¶67

JITESH LAL 2026.07.21 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶68

CRM-M-26710-2026

¶69

-14-

¶70

her property. This is corroborated from the fact that applicant Taranjot Kaur received OTPs on her Aadhaar registered mobile number for updating her Aadhaar information, without her having initiated any such activity. She received 2 such OTPs on 31.10.2024 and another 2 such OTPs on 17.12.2024. Copy of the 2 OTPs dated 31.10.2024 and 2 OTPs dated 17.12.2024 is attached as ANNEXURE A-27. Fearing fraud, the applicant immediately informed the UIDAI helpline by sending e-mails dated 31.10.2024 and 20.12.2024 to [email protected], and also took legal remedy. The e-mails are attached as ANNEXURE A-28. However, these persons need to be restrained from using the applicant's identification documents with the intent to defraud her. 48. That Jagtar Singh has hatched a criminal conspiracy with other persons by producing forged documents pertaining to agreement to sell and forged receipts and also impersonating some other person as Taranjot Kaur for the purpose of cheating and used the forged documents as genuine. There are direct allegations of forgery and cheating made out against Jagtar Singh and other persons involved in this matter and thus, committed a heinous offence. There is ample evidence on record against Jagtar Singh in this relevant connection. Keeping in view the present facts and circumstances, an FIR may kindly be registered under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B along with other relevant Sections of IPC and BNS 2023 against above named persons immediately or any other person involved with Jagtar Singh in committing the offence. Dated:- 6/06/2025 Complainant (Signed: Taranjot Kaur) (Taranjot Kaur) D/o late Sh. Hardial Singh Sekhon and legal heir i.e. daughter of late Smt. Gurdip Kaur R/o House No. 2792, Phase-7, Sector 62, SAS Nagar Mohali. M: 9316132654.”

¶71

JITESH LAL 2026.07.21 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶72

CRM-M-26710-2026

¶73

-15-

¶74

The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR has been registered at the instance of one Taranjot Kaur who is an Imposter and there is a serious dispute regarding her identity, addresses and documents. Taranjot Kaur has filed an application in a civil suit for permanent injunction filed by the petitioner for impleading her as well as Gurdip Kaur and Eveleen Kaur Sekhon as defendants which application is pending adjudication. There is a gap of 4 years between the complainant taking her matriculation and her Sr. Secondary Certificate examination. It is a civil dispute which has been given the colour of a criminal offence which is impermissible in law. As the case is based on documentary evidence which are in possession of the Investigating Agency, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required and therefore, he is entitled to the concession of anticipatory bail.

¶75

On the other hand, the learned counsel for respondent No.1/U.T., Chandigarh contends that one Varyam Kaur was the owner of the property in question bearing House No.53, Sector 8-A, Chandigarh, the value of which is about Rs.100 crores. Varyam Kaur who died on 08.12.1996 had a daughter namely, Gurdip Kaur Sekhon who was an IAS Officer married to Hardial Singh Sekhon who was serving in the police. The property was inherited by Gurdip Kaur Sekhon. Gurdip Kaur Sekhon passed on 22.11.2001 whereas Hardial Singh Sekhon passed away on 08.06.1986. Their legal heirs are their daughter Taranjot Kaur alias Slony Taranjot Kaur, the present complainant currently residing at

¶76

JITESH LAL 2026.07.21 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶77

CRM-M-26710-2026

¶78

-16-

¶79

House No.2792, Phase-VII, Sector 61, SAS Nagar, Mohali and son Lajeshwar Singh who passed away on 13.09.2023 leaving behind his wife Navdip Kaur and daughter Eveleen Kaur. The learned Senior counsel contends that the suit filed by the petitioner for permanent injunction is based on fabricated documents. The agreement to sell dated 29.09.1998 (Annexure R-1) purportedly executed by Gurdip Kaur Sekhon in favour of the petitioner is dated 29.09.1998. It is witnessed by Varyam Kaur, the mother of Gurdip Kaur who died much earlier on 18.12.1996. It is allegedly thumb marked by Taranjot Kaur who as per her passport and travel documents was in the U.S.A. pursuing higher studies. The petitioner produced receipts dated 14.03.1993, 01.01.2000, 08.12.2000 and 08.01.2001 all purportedly bearing the signatures/thumb impressions of complainant/Taranjot Kaur and her grandmother Smt. Varyam Kaur as witnesses but Taranjot Kaur was studying abroad on all the given dates between 29.09.1998 to 08.01.2001. Apparently, the signatures/thumb impressions of both the witnesses appearing upon the aforesaid documents prima facie appear to be forged and fabricated. A bare perusal and comparison of the signatures of Gurdip Kaur Sekhon as appearing on her passport (Annexure R-6) with the signatures on the agreement to sell would show that her signatures have been fabricated. The petitioner has prepared another forged agreement between himself and the complainant dated 23.12.2019 in which the complainant has allegedly acknowledged the agreement of the petitioner with her mother dated 29.09.1998 stating that she had no objection regarding the transfer

¶80

JITESH LAL 2026.07.21 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶81

CRM-M-26710-2026

¶82

-17-

¶83

of his property in his favour. This has been done so as to cover up the factum of delay of 20 years in filing a suit. The petitioner has also produced a death certificate of the complainant before the Civil Court showing her to have expired on 17.10.2024 and having no legal heirs. This purported death certificate of Taranjot Kaur has been procured on the basis of incorrect facts and by hoodwinking authorities and is being used to create false evidence before the Court to grab the property in question. Apparently, there are other persons who are in conspiracy with the present petitioner. A perusal of the letter dated 15.07.2019 submitted to the Estate Office by some women impersonating the complainant calling herself Taranjot Kaur daughter of Hardial Singh Sekhon reflects her date of birth as 01.01.1945. The date of birth mentioned in the passport of Gurdip Kaur Sekhon is 03.01.1938. If this be so then Imposter Taranjot Kaur was born only 7 years after the birth of her mother Gurdip Kaur Sekhon which is biologically impossible. This fact unequivocally establishes that the imposter Taranjot Kaur who has masqueraded as the present complainant at the instance of the petitioner is an imposter. The complainant has supplied multiple documents during the investigation to conclusively establish that she is Taranjot Kaur alias Slony Taranjot Kaur daughter of Gurdip Kaur Sekhon and Hardial Singh Sekhon. Further, a judgment in CWP No.10269 of 1997 titled as Taranjot Kaur Vs. Adviser to the Administrator, U.T., Chandigarh and others has been submitted by the complainant. A perusal of the judgment reflects that the petition was filed by the complainant to set aside the resumption

¶84

JITESH LAL 2026.07.21 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶85

CRM-M-26710-2026

¶86

-18-

¶87

order dated 14.12.1982, 03.10.1989 and 08.07.1992 pertaining to residential House No.215 Sector 16-A, Chandigarh and the particulars of the complainant specifically her DoB, name of father and mother including date of the death of her father Hardial Singh Sekhon are in consonance with the other documents submitted by the complainant. In pursuance of the aforementioned judgment of this Court, possession of the House No.215, Sector 16A, Chandigarh has been handed over to the complainant Taranjot Kaur vide letter dated 28.04.2015 after verifying her identity and perusal of all papers submitted by her before the Estate Office, U.T., Chandigarh. He therefore contends that it stand established beyond any doubt that the complainant along with her sister-in-law Navdip Kaur and niece Eveleen Kaur are the heirs to the property bearing House No.53 Sector 8A, Chandigarh and all the documents set up by the petitioner in furtherance to the civil suit are forgeries. Therefore, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is certainly required to unearth the larger conspiracy and to establish the identity of the Imposter Taranjot Kaur. Thus, the present petition is liable to be dismissed.

¶88

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶89

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumitha Pradeep

¶90

Vs. Arun Kumar C.K. & Anr. 2022 Live Law (SC) 870 held that merely because custodial interrogation was not required by itself could not be a ground to grant anticipatory bail. The first and the foremost thing the Court hearing the anticipatory bail application is to consider is the prima

¶91

JITESH LAL 2026.07.21 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶92

CRM-M-26710-2026

¶93

-19-

¶94

facie case against the accused. The relevant extract of the judgment is reproduced hereinbelow:-

¶95

“ It may be true, as pointed out by learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.1, that charge-sheet has already been filed. It will be unfair to presume on our part that the Investigating Officer does not require Respondent No.1 for custodial interrogation for the purpose of further investigation.

¶96

Be that as it may, even assuming it a case where Respondent No.1 is not required for custodial interrogation, we are satisfied that the High Court ought not to have granted discretionary relief of anticipatory bail.

¶97

We are dealing with a matter wherein the original complainant (appellant herein) has come before this Court praying that the anticipatory bail granted by the High Court to the accused should be cancelled. To put it in other words, the complainant says that the High Court wrongly exercised its discretion while granting anticipatory bail to the accused in a very serious crime like POCSO and, therefore, the order passed by the High Court granting anticipatory bail to the accused should be quashed and set aside. In many anticipatory bail matters, we have noticed one common argument being canvassed that no custodial interrogation is required and, therefore, anticipatory bail may be granted. There appears to be a serious misconception of law that if no case for custodial interrogation is made out by the prosecution, then that alone would be a good ground to grant anticipatory bail. Custodial interrogation can be one of the relevant aspects to be considered along with other grounds while deciding an application seeking anticipatory bail. There may be many cases in which the custodial interrogation of the accused may not be

¶98

JITESH LAL 2026.07.21 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶99

CRM-M-26710-2026

¶100

-20-

¶101

required, but that does not mean that the prima facie case against the accused should be ignored or overlooked and he should be granted anticipatory bail. The first and foremost thing that the court hearing an anticipatory bail application should consider is the prima facie case put up against the accused. Thereafter, the nature of the offence should be looked into along with the severity of the punishment. Custodial interrogation can be one of the grounds to decline custodial interrogation. However, even if custodial interrogation is not required or necessitated, by itself, cannot be a ground to grant anticipatory bail .

¶102

The various documents submitted by the complainant during the investigation, some of which form part of the record to establish her parentage, date of birth, and the fact that she is also known as Taranjot Kaur alias Slony Taranjot Kaur are enumerated hereinbelow:-

¶103

Sr. No.	Name of Document	Date
1.	Affidavit of Saloni Taranjot Kaur, D/o Hardial Singh, DoB: 26.09.1973, R/o H. No. 2792, Phase-VII, Mohali.	03.06.2015
2.	Aadhaar Card of Taranjot Kaur, D/o Hardial Singh, DoB: 26.09.1973, R/o H. No. 2792, Phase-VII, Sector 61, Mohali (SAS Nagar), bearing Aadhaar No. 4701 8857 4171.	—
3.	PAN Card of Taranjot Kaur, D/o Hardial Singh, DoB: 26.09.1973, Permanent Account Number (PAN): BJFPK1888M.	—
4.	Driving Licence bearing No. PB-6520160238952 of Taranjot Kaur, D/o Hardial Singh, DoB: 26.09.1973, R/o H. No. 2792, Phase-VII, Sector 61, Mohali (SAS Nagar); Blood Group: B+ve; Date of Issue: 01.04.2024; Valid up to 25.09.2033.	01.04.2024
5.	Identity Card issued by the Department of Education, Government of Punjab in the name of Taranjot Kaur, D/o Hardial Singh, Deputy Manager, R/o H. No. 2792, Phase- VII, Sector 61, Mohali (SAS Nagar); Mobile No. 9316132654.	27.06.2019
6.	Voter Identity Card bearing No. DFZ1757426 of Taranjot Kaur, D/o Hardial Singh, R/o H. No. 2792, Phase-VII, Sector 61, Mohali (SAS Nagar).	15.01.2003

¶104

JITESH LAL 2026.07.21 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶105

CRM-M-26710-2026

¶106

-21-

¶107

It is apparent that the agreement to sell dated 29.09.1998 (Annexure R-1) which is the basis of the civil suit for permanent injunction is a forgery. It is stated to be signed by Gurdip Kaur Sekhon, the owner and purported seller of the property. However, a bare perusal of the signature of Gurdip Kaur Sekhon as visible on the agreement (Annexure R-1) with her signature on the passport (Annexure R-6) would make it apparent that the signatures have been fabricated. Further, Varyam Kaur, the mother of Gurdip Kaur Sekhon is stated to have thumb marked the agreement on 29.09.1998 though she is passed away on 08.12.1996. Thirdly, Taranjot Kaur is stated to have thumb marked the agreement though she signs documents as she is highly educated. Her signature existing on her passport clearly shows her to have signed as Slony as Taranjot Kaur. All the purported receipts of payment allegedly signed by the complainant and Varyam Kaur are fabricated because Varyam Kaur had already passed away whereas the complainant was abroad.

¶108

The contention of the petitioner that there is a gap of 04 years between the complainant clearing her matriculation examination in March, 1988 and passing her Sr. Secondary Certificate Examination in 1992 thereby creating a dispute regarding her identity is baseless. In fact, the complainant had dropped two years on account of the severe illness of her grandmother Varyam Kaur who she was taking care off. In fact, the complainant ultimately went to study in the USA where she was educated at Standford University. At the instance of the present

¶109

JITESH LAL 2026.07.21 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶110

CRM-M-26710-2026

¶111

-22-

¶112

petitioner, certain complaints were made against the present complainant because of which she was constrained to approach this Court seeking protection from harassment. During the course of the inquiry conducted by Vigilance Bureau, Punjab, the identity of the complainant has been clearly established as Taranjot Kaur who is currently working as Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan as a Deputy Manager (HRMS ID 934). Further, way back in the year 2015 the complainant had already furnished an affidavit regarding her name being Taranjot Kaur alias Slony Taranjot Kaur D/o Hardial and her date of birth 26.09.1973.

¶113

The relevant extract of the reply dated 30.06.2026 filed by the respondent No.1-U.T., Chandigarh wherein the identity of Taranjot Kaur/complainant has been categorically established is reproduced hereinbelow:-

¶114

“5. That further it is necessary to submit here that the complainant has supplied sufficient material and documents before the investigating agency, which conclusively establish that she is alive and there is absolutely no dispute regarding her identity. During investigation, the documents i.e. Aadhaar, PAN, Driving License, Govt. ID card, Voter card and an affidavit dated 19.05.2025 have been taken on record from the complainant to clear all doubts regarding her identity. Further it is necessary to mention here that during an enquiry in a complaint No.555 of 2024, the Vigilance Bureau Punjab had verified all above mentioned documents pertaining to the ID of the complainant and even submitted an affidavit in CRM-M-3687-2025 filed by the complainant Taranjot Kaur and categorically submitted that no evidence of forgery or fraud was found in enquiry. Copy of the

¶115

JITESH LAL 2026.07.21 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶116

CRM-M-26710-2026

¶117

-23-

¶118

affidavit dated 19.05.2025 and copies of Aadhaar, PAN, Driving License, Govt. ID card, Voter card are annexed herewith as Annexure R-7 and Annexure R-8.

¶119

6. That besides the above mentioned evidence, a copy of judgment dated 05.09.2014 passed by this Hon'ble Court in CWP No.10269 of 1997, titled as Taranjot Kaur Vs. Advisor to the Administrator, U.T. Chandigarh & others has also been submitted by the complainant to the investigation agency. Perusal of the judgment reflects that the petition was filed by the complainant to set aside the resumption order dated 14.12.1982, order in appeal dated 03.10.1989 passed by the Chief Administrator and order dated 08.07.1992 passed by Advisor to the Administrator, U.T. Chandigarh in Revision Petition pertaining to the residential H.No.215, Sector 16-A, Chandigarh and particulars of the complainant specifically her DOB, name of father and mother, including the date of death of complainant's father S.Hardial Singh Sekhon are in consonance to the documents submitted by the complainant mentioned in the preceding paras. It is also necessary to mention here that in pursuance to the abovementioned judgment of this Hon'ble Court, possession of H.No.215, Sector 16-A, Chandigarh was handed over to the complainant Taranjot Kaur vide letter No.10904, dated 28.04.2015 after verifying her identity proof and perusal of all papers submitted by complainant Taranjot Kaur before the Estate Officer, U.T. Chandigarh also reflect that particulars proving her identity are in consonance to the above mentioned documents i.e. Aadhaar, PAN, Driving License, Govt. ID card, Voter card (Annexure R-8). Copies of judgment dated 05.09.2014 and possession letter dated 28.04.2015 and the documents submitted by the complainant Taranjot Kaur before the Estate Officer while taking possession on 30.04.2015 are annexed herewith as Annexure R-9 and Annexure R-10.

¶120

JITESH LAL 2026.07.21 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶121

CRM-M-26710-2026

¶122

-24-

¶123

7. That keeping in view of the above mentioned submissions qua the evidence to prove identity of the complainant, it is apparently clear on the record that complainant Taranjot Kaur is daughter of Hardial Singh Sekhon and the imposter who was masquerading as Taranjot Kaur is a third person set up by the petitioner to usurp prime property of the complainant through forged documents.

¶124

8. That petitioner has tried to mislead this Hon'ble Court that depicting the picture that the dispute is of the Civil in nature and no offence is made out against him, however, the material collected during investigation prima facie establishes commission of serious criminal offences involving forgery, fabrication of evidence, impersonation and criminal conspiracy. Further, it is submitted that investigation in the present case is still underway and several important aspects are yet to be thoroughly investigated after arrest of the accused, including recovery of all original documents, the manner of procurement of the alleged death certificate of the complainant, and investigation into the involvement of other persons and impersonators in the conspiracy and preparation of forged documents. Thus, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is absolutely necessary for proper investigation of the present case. Without custodial interrogation, it would be extremely difficult for the investigating agency to unearth the complete conspiracy, identify all persons involved and recover the original documents/material used in commission of the offences.

¶125

9. That the allegations against the petitioner are grave and serious in nature and clearly indicate that a larger conspiracy has been hatched by the petitioner in connivance with other persons only with an intention to illegally usurp the aforesaid prime property worth more than Rs.100 crores.”

¶126

JITESH LAL 2026.07.21 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶127

CRM-M-26710-2026

¶128

-25-

¶129

As the offence is prima facie established and the investigation is to be taken to its logical conclusion of ascertaining other conspirators in the preparation of forged documents etc. the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is certainly necessary.

¶130

In view of the aforementioned discussion, I find no merit in the present petition. Therefore, the same stands dismissed.

¶131

However, the observations made hereinabove are only for the purposes of deciding this bail petition and the Trial Court is free to adjudicate upon the matter on the basis of the evidence led before it uninfluenced by any such observations made herein.

¶132

(JASJIT SINGH BEDI) JUDGE

¶133

21.07.2026

¶134

JITESH

¶135

Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:Yes/No

¶136

JITESH LAL 2026.07.21 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Jagtar Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jagtar Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Avtar Singh Vs State of Haryana and Others

Sukhvir Singh Alias Happy Vs State of Punjab

Bittu Singh Vs State of Haryana

Kuldeep Vs State of Haryana

Suraj Alias Suraj Dhighan Vs State of Punjab

Binny Kaushal Vs State of Punjab and Another