Jai Ram v. State Of Punjab
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
Case No. : CRM-M-13174-2025 Pronounced On : August 20, 2025 Jai Ram ....
Petitioner vs.
State of Punjab ....
Respondent CORAM :
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUKHVINDER KAUR.
* * * Present :
Mr. Surmeet Singh Sandhu, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Navdeep Singh, DAG, Punjab.
* * * SUKHVINDER KAUR , J.
:
Prayer in the present petition, filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, in case FIR No.26 dated 22.05.2024, under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station NRI (Urban), District Jalandhar.
Briefly, the case of the prosecution is that the complainant namely Bhajan Singh Chima, who is NRI of about 87 years and resident of London (UK), made complaint through e-mail dated 05.04.2024 to ADGP (NRIs), Punjab, against 12 persons, in which it was stated that the complainant has his property in India in village Khambra, District Jalandhar measuring 73 marlas 102 sq. ft. In the said premises, six main houses and one out-house have been constructed. In order to look after his aforesaid property, he had appointed one Sukhwinder Singh as Chowkidar along with his wife Kamaljit Kaur. However, after having a dispute with his wife, said
Sukhwinder Singh left the property of the complainant but on request of his wife, she was allowed by the complainant to live in the servant quarter. After separation from her husband, said Kamaljit Kaur brought two persons namely Vijay Kumar and Sunil Rai in the said servant quarter. Both these persons were anti-social elements. When the complainant visited his property during his visit to India, he was told that some documents had been created by some unknown persons with a motive to grab his property. On inquiry, it came to his notice that a General Power of Attorney (GPA) dated 31.01.2023 was made by impersonation and photographs, signatures, thumb impressions etc. on the said GPA were forged ones. Though the complainant was an old ailing man of 87 years, but on the said GPA, a young man was shown to be Bhajan Singh (complainant) and Aadhar Card shown with the documents was also forged one. The said forged GPA was drafted by one Om Parkash Verma, Advocate and identification of fictitious man as the complainant Bhajan Singh was done by Sukhwinder Ram - Lambardar and Tejinder Singh.
The aforesaid complaint further revealed that on the basis of aforesaid forged GPA, a special Power of Attorney dated 13.03.2023 was created by Manpreet (who was attorney holder as per the GPA dated 31.01.2023) in favour of Samson Masih. On the basis of this special Power of Attorney, aforesaid Samson Masih executed alleged sale deed and sold the property of the complainant measuring 03 kanals 13 marlas 102 sq. ft. to one Surinder Kaur wife of Gurkirpal Singh in the presence of witnesses Sunil Bali and Amar Singh (actually, the present petitioner) vide sale deed dated 11.10.2023. In fact, the petitioner, in connivance with aforesaid Sunil Bali, forged and fabricated Aadhar Card of one Amar Singh and by using the
same, signed the sale deed dated 11.10.2023 as a witness, thereby committing offence of cheating by impersonation. All this documentation has been done in connivance with aforesaid Kamaljit Kaur, who is in possession of a portion of the property and has been illegally residing there. On the basis of fake documents, even mutation has also been got entered into. The complainant stated that in fact, he was not present in India at the time of execution of GPA dated 31.01.2023 or special Power of Attorney dated 13.03.2023. Even he does not know the witnesses and executors of the aforesaid Power of Attorneys and therefore, the question of appointing them as Attorney does not arise. The entire activity, in fact, is a result of fraud and impersonation. On the basis of this complaint, the FIR in question was registered.
Learned counsel for petitioner has contended that the petitioner has been falsely involved in the present case. He was not named in the FIR. Nothing has been recovered from him. Learned counsel further urged that trial of the case is likely to take time. Therefore, the petitioner be granted concession of regular bail.
Learned State counsel, on the other hand, has strongly opposed the present bail petition while contending that during interrogation, the present petitioner also made a disclosure statement that he signed upon the sale deed in question as Amar Singh, whereas his actual name is Jai Ram. He also admitted that the aforesaid Aadhar Card of Amar Singh was a forged one and the same was prepared by co-accused Samson Masih. He further contended that in view of increasing number of frauds with the NRI persons, in order to grab their properties, the petitioner is not entitled for bail by this Court. He prayed that the present petition deserves dismissal.
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the case file.
The petitioner is not named in the FIR. As per the allegations, the only role attributed to the petitioner is that he impersonated himself as Amar Singh in the sale deed in question while signing it as a witness, whereas his actual name is Jai Ram.
As per the Custody Certificate dated 05.08.2025 produced on record, the petitioner is in custody since 27.12.2024. The case is triable by Magistrate. Whether the petitioner was actually involved in the alleged impersonation or not, would be seen during trial of the case, which is not likely to be concluded soon. So, no useful purpose would be served by further detaining the petitioner behind the bars. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be admitted on regular bail, on furnishing adequate bail bonds and surety bonds, to the satisfaction of concerned learned Trial Judge/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate.
However, nothing observed herein above shall be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. The observations recorded above are only for the purpose of deciding the present bail petition. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of along with the present petition.
August 20, 2025 (SUKHVINDER KAUR) monika JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned ?
Yes/No.
Whether reportable ?
Yes/No.