Reena Vs State of Haryana — Cheating and Forgery | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

Reena Vs State of Haryana — Cheating and Forgery | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail: interim order dated 17.03.2026 made absolute, subject to the petitioner continuing to join investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer and abiding by the conditions provided under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS in case FIR No.351 dated 02.08.2024 registered under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC at Police Station City Bhiwani, District Bhiwani. +1 more

Court's answer

By interim order dated 17.03.2026, the petitioner was directed to join investigation within a week and cooperate with the Investigating Agency, and in the event of arrest was to be admitted to interim bail on furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting/Investigating Officer, subject to the conditions envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023.

Ratio / Principle

In view of the statement of learned State counsel (petitioner joined investigation and is no longer required), the interim order dated 17.03.2026 is made absolute; the petitioner shall continue to join investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer and shall abide by the conditions provided under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail — granted (interim order made absolute). Petition under Section 482 BNSS by REENA for anticipatory bail in FIR No.351 dated 02.08.2024, Police Station City Bhiwani, District Bhiwani, registered under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC. By interim order dated 17.03.2026 the petitioner was directed to join investigation and, in the event of arrest, to be admitted to interim bail on furnishing bail/surety bonds, subject to the conditions envisaged under Section 482(2) BNSS, 2023. On 02.04.2026 the Court recorded that the petitioner had joined investigation and that State counsel (on instructions from ASI Ravikant) confirmed she was no longer required for further investigation; the interim order was made absolute, with a direction to continue joining investigation as and when called and to abide by Section 482(2) BNSS conditions. Counsel for the complainant had affirmed a compromise between the parties and had no objection to the petition. Counsel for the petitioner had contended that the husband (Manoj Kumar, granted regular bail on 21.07.2025 in CRM-M-28415-2025) obtained a General Power of Attorney without her consent and sold her land after obtaining loan from the complainant-company on forged documents; the petitioner denied signing any documents or appearing before the Registrar office.

CRM-M-8777-2026

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

211

CRM-M-8777-2026 Date of decision: 02.04.2026

REENA

….Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA

....Respondent

CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL

Present:- M r. Sandeep Kumar Yadav, Adv o cate f o r the petitioner.

M r. Mohit Chaudhary, AAG, Ha r yana.

M r. Sandeep Chopra, Advocate f o r the complainant.

RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J. (ORAL)

T hrough the instant petition filed under Section 482 of th e Bharatiya Na g arik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (f o r short “BNSS”), the petitioner s seek anticipat o ry bail in case FIR No.351 da t ed 02.08.2024 registered unde r Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC at Police Station City Bhiwani , District Bhiw a ni.

O n 17.03.2026, the following or d er was passed by this Court: - “Prayer in the present pe t ition filed under Section 482 o f t h e BNSS, 2023 is for grant of a n ticipatory bail to the petitione r i n case FIR No.351 dated 02.08 . 2024 registered under Section s

GURPREET 2026.04.02 19:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document.

CRM-M-8777-2026

2

406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120 - B IPC at Police Station Cit y B hiwani, District Bhiwani.

Learned counsel for th e petitioner contends that th e petitioner has been falsely imp l icated in the present case. H e s u bmits that the husband of the p etitioner, without obtaining he r c o nsent, got the General Power o f Attorney in his name and sol d her land to various persons in c o nnivance with other co-accuse d persons after obtaining loan fro m the complainant-company o n f o rged documents. He argues that the petitioner has no t c o mmitted any fraud as she neither appeared before th e R egistrar office at the time of s elling of the land nor she ha d s i gned any documents to obtain any loan from the complainant - c o mpany. He argues that hus b and of the petitioner namel y M anoj Kumar has already bee n granted concession of regula r bail by Co-ordinate Bench o f this Court vide order date d 21.07.2025 passed in CRM-M-2 8 415-2025. He submits that th e m atter has been compromised between the parties. Learne d c o unsel has further submitted t h at the petitioner is ready an d w illing to join the investigation as and when called upon to do s o b y the investigating agency.

On the other hand, learn e d State counsel has vehementl y o p posed the petition for bail and submits that the offenc e c o mmitted by the petitioner is s erious in nature. However, h e s u bmits that he is not aware of a ny compromise, if any, betwee n t h e parties.

Mr. Sandeep Chopra, Adv o cate has put in appearance o n behalf of the complainant, has fi l ed his memo of appearance an d s e eks some time to file his vak a latnama. The same is taken o n r e cord. He has also affirmed th e factum of compromise betwee n t h e parties and submits that h e has no objection if presen t petition is allowed.

Adjourned to 02.04.2026.

In the meantime, the p etitioner is directed to joi n i n vestigation within a week from today and would appear as an d

GURPREET 2026.04.02 19:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document.

CRM-M-8777-2026

3

w hen required by the Investiga t ing Officer and cooperate wit h t h e Investigating Agency. In th e event of arrest, she shall b e admitted to interim bail on furni s hing of bail/surety bonds to th e s a tisfaction of Arresting/Investi g ating Officer. The petitioner s s h all also abide by the condition s as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023.”

L earned counsel for the petition e r submits that in compliance o f the order dated 17.03.2026 passed by this Co u rt, the petitioner has joined th e investigation.

L earned counsel for the State, on instructions from AS I Ravikant, has submitted that the petitioner h a s joined the investigation and i s no longer req u ired for further investigation.

I n view of the statement made by learned State counsel, th e interim order dated 17.03.2026 passed by th i s Court, is made absolute. Th e petitioner sh a ll continue to join investigati o n, as and when called by th e Investigating O fficer and shall also abide by t he conditions as provided unde r Section 482(2 ) of the BNSS.

02.04.2026

(RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL) JUDGE

Gurpreet

i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/ N o ii) Whether reportable? Yes/No

GURPREET 2026.04.02 19:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document.