Sarfraj Khan v. State Of Haryana And Another
CRM-M-18212-2026 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH Sr.No.217 CRM-M-18212-2026 Decided on : 22.04.2026 Sarfaraj Khan ...... Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and another ...... Respondents CORAM :
*** Present :
Mr. Gautam Dutt, Senior Advocate with Mr. Saifuddin Shams, Advocate, Mr. Saurabh Sharma, Advocate Ms. Shabnam, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Mohit Chaudhary, AAG, Haryana for the respondent-State.
Mr. Lokendra Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2.
*** , J (ORAL)
!"
# $ % &' #
%& '
( )
* +
, - )
.
), )
* /
)
0
!"
CRM-M-18212-2026 2
1
)
)
)
0
* )
1
+
!"
)
)
/ ) )
1
$ %
!" 2 +
$ / #
It is further contended that there is nothing on record to connect the petitioner with the alleged offence. No recovery is to be effected from the petitioner and his custodial interrogation is not required. Learned counsel also submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation as and when called upon to do so by the Investigating Agency and shall fully cooperate with the investigating agency. On these grounds, it is prayed that the present petition be allowed. 4 On the other hand, learned State counsel has filed the status report which is taken on record. He, while referring to the said report, has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail by submitting that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature.
He submits that the petitioner is the main conspirator of the alleged offence. He further contends that the alleged GPA was executed in the name of petitioner by co-accused. Further, the petitioner had transferred the aforementioned property in favour of his mother on the strength of forged documents i.e. mutations and forged power of attorney thereby facilitating the illegal transfer of the property without any consideration.
CRM-M-18212-2026 3 contends that the petitioner had played a central and pivotal role in orchestrating the entire conspiracy and acted as the driving force behind the illegal transfer of the said property, thus, he does not deserve any concession from this Court.
$ 0 6.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature and pertain to forgery, cheating and illegal transfer of property. The material placed on record prima facie indicates the involvement of the petitioner in execution and utilization of forged documents for unlawful gain. The contention regarding delay in registration of the FIR, though noted, cannot be gone into in detail at this stage and is a matter of trial. This Court is sanguine of the fact that while considering the petition for anticipatory bail, it is required to consider the overall nature of offence and accusation against the accused, the manner of occurrence, the gravity of offence and the potential impact of granting pre-arrest protection, at this stage.
Granting anticipatory bail with such allegations, at this preliminary stage, would not be justified as it may affect the course of fair investigation and undermine and seriousness of the alleged act. Considering the gravity of the allegations, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary for effective investigation in the matter.
3 !
)
4 2 +
*
&'5 4
-
)
.
.
CRM-M-18212-2026 4 + ) 2
!
+
6 )
0 7 ) 4
+ 8
! "#$
%
!
%
&
'
(
'
%
0 9 )4
"P. Chidambaram v. Directorate of Enforcement", (2019) 9 SCC 24+
)
+
/ ) 5 *
6 )
8, ))*
!
! + (
, -.
%! !
! /0! #$ 12.
CRM-M-18212-2026 5
*
,
4 5
6 )$.
! "#$ . ,
, 7
5
8
5
* %9 -
:::::::::
$#;
!
%
;
<
5
8
4 # :
4 )
) /
;*
*
+ *) + 5
* ) )
CRM-M-18212-2026 6 !
)
* )
/
)
<
))
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No =
8><