Gurdev Kaur @ Debo , Mohini v. State Of Punjab

THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 1.

CRM-M No.26820 of 2025 Date of decision: July 15th, 2025 Gurdev Kaur @ Debo, Mohni .....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab .....Respondent 2.

CRM-M No.32565 of 2025 (O&M) Manjit Kaur @ Rani @ Golo .....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab .....Respondent 3.

CRM-M No.32572 of 2025 (O&M) Mohinder Kaur @ Jallo .....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab .....Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present:

Ms. Kuljeet Kaur Sandhu, Advocate for the petitioner (in CRM-M-26820-2025).

Mr. Yagsimant Attri, Advocate for Ms. Mankirat Kaur Sra, Advocate for the petitioners (in CRM-M-32565 and 32572-2025). Mr. Amit Rana, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. MANJARI NEHRU KAUL , J.

The present batch of petitions for grant of anticipatory bail is being disposed of by way of this common order, as all the petitions arise out of the same FIR i.e. FIR No.14 dated 15.03.2025 under Sections 419,

420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of the IPC registered at Police Station Rawalpindi, Kapurthala.

2.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners have contended that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present FIR (Annexure P-1) for the alleged involvement in an organized conspiracy to impersonate certain individuals and execute fraudulent sale deeds before the Sub Registrar, using fabricated identity documents.

3.

It has been submitted that the petitioners have been dragged into the present proceedings solely on account of their familial relationship with the prime accused Harjinder Singh. 4.

It has been submitted that as far as petitioner Mohinder Kaur @ Jallo is concerned, it is urged, she is the maternal aunt of co-accused Harjinder Singh. She is alleged to have provided her Aadhaar Card to him in good faith, on the belief that it was required for lawful property related purposes. It has been further submitted that she did not sign any sale deed, was not present at the Sub Registrar's office during its execution, and derived no benefit therefrom. Qua petitioner Manjeet Kaur @ Rani @ Golo, the mother of the principal accused, it is submitted that she also handed over her identification documents to her son in trust and good faith. It has been argued that she had no role in the alleged conspiracy, and there is no direct evidence of her involvement in any kind of impersonation or fraud.

5.

Similarly, qua petitioner Gurudev Kaur @ Debo, learned counsel has submitted that she is a distant relative of the main accused, and is alleged to have impersonated one Mohini, wife of Ranbir Singh.

Learned counsel submits that she is not even a resident of the concerned village and that her location data would prove her absence from the scene of occurrence on the relevant date. It has been further submitted there is no material linking her with the forged documents or execution of any power of attorney.

6.

Learned counsel for the petitioners have emphasized that all three petitioners are women with no previous criminal antecedents, and the investigation is largely documentary in nature. It has been argued that in the circumstances, their custodial interrogation would not be warranted and, therefore, they be extended the concession of bail. 7.

On being put to notice, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the prayer and submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and has drawn the attention of this Court to the status report filed by way of affidavit of Deputy Superintendent of Police Sub Division Phagwara, District Kapurthala. It has been argued that the petitioners are not passive or peripheral figures but constitute active members of a meticulously planned criminal conspiracy, spearheaded by prime accused Harjinder Singh, who is their close relative.

8.

It is alleged that the petitioners knowingly participated in the creation of forged Aadhaar and PAN cards, impersonated genuine landowners before the Sub Registrar, and facilitated the execution of fraudulent powers of attorney and sale deeds in favour of Mewa Singh, father of none other than co-accused Harjinder Singh. Their role, as per the investigation, is not merely supportive but instrumental in the completion of the alleged fraud.

9.

Learned State counsel has still further contended that the offence in question is of a highly organized nature, involving deliberate impersonation, fabrication of documents, and calculated deceit, with the aim of usurping land through misrepresentation before a public authority. Still further, learned State counsel has prayed for dismissal of the instant petitions as the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is essential to unearth the broader ramifications of the conspiracy, identify all co-conspirators, recover original documents, and establish the modus operandi in its entirety. The allegations against the petitioners are of a grave and serious nature.

10.

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

11.

The allegations against the petitioners are of a grave and serious nature. The FIR (Annexure P-1) indicates prima facie active involvement of all the petitioners in a systematic plan to impersonate genuine landowners by using forged identity documents, and thereafter, to execute sale deeds by misusing the identity of third parties. The nature of the fraud alleged is not merely documentary but appears to be part of a wider criminal conspiracy involving multiple actors, including the petitioners, each having a defined role. 12.

The argument that the petitioners were unaware of the use of their identity documents or were misled due to familial relations cannot be accepted at this stage in light of the specific allegations and the need for a deeper probe into their roles. 13.

Whether the petitioners were passive victims of deception or complicit actors in the larger conspiracy is a matter for investigation,

and cannot be conclusively determined without custodial interrogation. 14.

Furthermore, the impersonation of real individuals before the office of a public authority, namely the Sub Registrar, with the intent to give a legal cover to an otherwise fraudulent transaction, strikes at the very root of public trust and legal sanctity of official records. The nature of the offence, therefore, is not only serious but has far-reaching implications on public administration.

15.

In the light of the serious allegations indicating prima facie involvement of the petitioners in an elaborate conspiracy leading to execution of fraudulent sale deeds, this Court is not inclined to extend the extraordinary concession of anticipatory bail to them. 16.

Accordingly, the present petitions stand dismissed. 17.

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.

July 15th, 2025 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Puneet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes Whether reportable :

No