Jaswinder Singh v. State Of Punjab
108-1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH DECIDED ON: 23.02.2026 JASWINDER SINGH .....PETITIONER
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB .....RESPONDENT
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH.
Present:
Mr. Imran Farooqi, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Neeraj Madaan, Sr. DAG, Punjab.
Mr. Sunny Kumar Singla, Advocate, for the complainant. SANJAY VASHISTH , J (ORAL) 1.
Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438 Cr.P.C.), is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:- Name & age of Petitioner FIR No.
Date Section(s) Police Station District (s) Jaswinder Singh, aged about 48 years 30.08.2025 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of IPC Sadar Ahmedgarh Malerkotla 2.
On 14.10.2025, following order was passed by this Court:- "Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438 Cr.P.C.), is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:-
Name & age of Petitioner FIR No.
Date Section(s) Police Station District (s) Jaswinder Singh, aged about 48 years 30.08.2025 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of IPC Sadar Ahmedgarh Malerkotla 2.
Allegation in the FIR is that there was a person in the name of Tara Chand and after his death, land measuring 07 bighas of agricultural, one residential house/kothi measuring about 05 biswas, and 01 bigha of commercial property on the Ludhiana-Malerkotla main road, inherited by the complainant - Daljit Singh, his mother - Smt. Mukhtiar Kaur and his sister - Kulwinder Kaur. Mother of the complainant - Smt. Mukhtiar Kaur, expired on 14.02.2023, and thereafter, one GPA on behalf of her on 12.03.2024 was made, and further on the basis of which, sold the land in question to one Bhajan Singh through a sale-deed. 3.
Allegation against the present petitioner is that he is the attesting witness, who identified the impersonator, who appeared in place of complainant - Daljit Singh, but complainant was residing abroad. 4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that, upon seeing the Aadhaar Card, the petitioner might have attested the General Power of Attorney dated 12.03.2024; however, he was not the direct beneficiary of the sale deed or the property in question. Therefore, in the absence of any specific motive to cheat the complainant party, no offence can be said to have been committed by the petitioner. Additionally, it is submitted that even if any sale deed has been executed on the basis of a forged GPA, the title of the land would not stand transferred and such a document would not confer any legal right upon the transferee of the property.
Moreover, the allegations are primarily based on documentary evidence, which can be duly verified during the course of investigation, and hence, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not warranted. The petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation, if protected from arrest.
5.
Notice of motion.
6.
On advance notice, learned State counsel puts in appearance on behalf of the respondent - State, and seeks some time to respond to the submissions addressed by learned counsel opposite, after seeking instructions. And, in case of necessity, to file status
report highlighting therein role and antecedents of the petitioner.
7.
At this stage, Mr. Gaurav Vir Singh Behl, Advocate, puts in appearance on behalf of the complainant and files his memo of appearance. He undertakes to file his Vakalatnama in due course of time.
8.
Adjourned to 16.12.2025.
9.
Till the next date of hearing, petitioner shall not be arrested. However, question of joining of investigation of the petitioner would be examined on the next date of hearing."
3.
Learned State counsel has filed comprehensive status report dated 23.02.2026 in the Court today and the same is taken on record. 4.
As per the status report, petitioner-Jaswinder Singh, is the Numberdar of the village. It is an almost admitted position that he identified the wrong person, which allegedly resulted in the execution of a forged General Power of Attorney in favour of Bhajan Singh. 5.
Role attributed to the petitioner and the connecting evidence against him, as reflected in the status report, are reproduced hereunder:- "That it is respectfully submitted that during the course of inquiry it has emerged that the present petitioner-Jaswinder Singh, Numberdar of village AhmedgarhChhanna, is a signatory and identifier in Power of Attorney Deed No. 4/123 dated 13.03.2024 (executed on 12.03.2024), purportedly executed by respondent No.2-Daljit Singh, wherein he identified and introduced an individual as Daljit Singh before the Sub-Registrar and appended his signatures as an attesting witness; however, passport and immigration records collected during investigation establish that the real Daljit Singh had departed for the United States of America on 30.11.
2023 and was not present in India on the date of execution and registration of the said document. The said Power of Attorney, supported by an Aadhaar Card used for identification, was subsequently relied upon for effecting revenue mutation proceedings including Mutation No. 6943 and for execution of consequential sale deeds relating to the inherited property of late Tara Singh.
Commissioner, Malerkotla, vide reply dated 19.03.2025, has further confirmed that the endorsement relied upon in connected documents was non-existent. The attested Power of Attorney bearing the petitioner's signatures, the immigration record of Daljit Singh, the official verification report, and the mutation and sale deed records collectively form part of the documentary evidence collected during investigation. That whether the petitioner and the real Daljit Singh were personally known to each other prior to signing the forged document can be ascertained only upon custodial interrogation, which is indispensable for a fair and effective investigation." 6.
Since petitioner was serving as the Numberdar of the village, he is reasonably expected to be acquainted with the residents of the village and their identities. In such circumstances, this Court does not find any substantial reason to extend the concession of anticipatory bail, which is an extraordinary relief intended to prevent unwarranted arrest or prosecution. Accordingly, present petition stands dismissed. (SANJAY VASHISTH) 23.02.2026 JUDGE Lavisha Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No