Nazar Singh Alias Najar Singh v. State Of Punjab And Another
108-4
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH DECIDED ON: 23.02.2026 NAZAR SINGH ALIAS NAJAR SINGH .....PETITIONER
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER .....RESPONDENTS
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH.
Present:
Mr. Hasrat Brar, 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) Nazar Singh @ Najar Singh, aged about 74 years 30.08.2025 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC Sadar Ahmedgarh Malerkotla 2.
On 17.11.2025, following order was passed by this Court:- "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) Nazar Singh @ Najar Singh, aged about 74 years 30.08.2025 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC Sadar Ahmedgarh Malerkotla 2.
Allegations against the petitioner is that he was the attesting witnesses of the sale-deed, which was executed in favour of the co-accused Karamjit Kaur, and said co-accused has already been granted concession of anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 31.10.2025, passed in CRMM-607942025, titled as, "Karamjit Kaur v. State of Punjab" (Annexure P3), and said petition is now posted for its hearing on 16.12.2025.
Thus, he prays for grant of concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the present case. 3.
Notice of motion.
4.
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 by verifying the submissions addressed by the petitioner's counsel.
5.
Adjourned to 16.12.2025.
6.
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.
7.
To be heard along with CRM-M-60794-2025"
3.
Continuing his submissions, counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has become the witness to the sale deed (vasika) No.1018 dated 10.09.2024, executed in favour of Karamjit Kaur. In fact, the alleged forged Will in question dated 17.08.2019 or the General Power of Attorney dated 12.03.2024, and not the document which was prepared and signed by the petitioner. In fact, petitioner has not signed
any forged document and the sale deed was executed on the strength of GPA dated 12.03.2024, which already existed earlier in time. Lastly, it is submitted that petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation and to cooperate fully with the Investigating Agency, provided he is granted protection from arrest by this Court. 5.
Learned State counsel has filed comprehensive status report dated 23.02.2026 in the Court today and the same is taken on record. 6.
Role attributed to the petitioner and the connecting evidence against him, as reflected in the status report, are reproduced hereunder:- "That with reference to the facts stated supra, it is respectfully submitted that the evidence collected till date against the present petitioner-Nazar Singh is primarily documentary and contemporaneous in nature, comprising the registered Sale Deed (Vasika) No. 1018 dated 10.09.2024, wherein the petitioner is specifically recorded as an attesting witness, relating to transfer of land measuring 1 bigha 10 biswas in favour of Karamjit Kaur wife of Dharminder Singh, the said transfer having been effected on the basis of title flowing from the forged 'Will dated 17.08.2019 and the consequential Mutation No. 6943 sanctioned pursuant thereto.
The said sale deed forms part of the official registration record and establishes the petitioner's conscious association with the impugned transaction. The evidentiary chain further includes the revenue record reflecting the derivative nature of the title, the inquiry report of the Superintendent of Police, Sub-Division Ahmedgarh, and the legal opinion of the Deputy District Attorney (Legal), Malerkotla, which collectively record a prima facie finding that the forged antecedent documents were used as genuine to effectuate the said transfer. When read conjointly, the aforesaid material prima facie discloses the petitioner's involvement in offences punishable under Sections 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC, warranting further investigation.
knowledge can be conclusively ascertained only upon custodial interrogation, particularly in view of his failure to join the investigation."
7.
In view of the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and the stand reflected in the status report, this Court does not find any substantial reason to subject the petitioner to custodial interrogation. Accordingly, his plea for anticipatory bail is accepted, and present petition stands allowed.
8.
Accordingly, petitioner is directed to join the investigation within two weeks from today, or as and when called by the investigating agency, and in the eventuality of the arrest, petitioner would be released on anticipatory bail, subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall also be abide by all the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.).
9.
Besides, it is directed that petitioner would hand over his passport to the Investigating Agency or to Court concerned, if he possesses. Otherwise, would submit an affidavit, disclosing the fact that he does not possess any passport.
It is also directed that before leaving country any time during trial, petitioner would seek prior permission of the Court. 10.
With the directions as recorded here above, present petition stands disposed of.
(SANJAY VASHISTH) 23.02.2026 JUDGE Lavisha Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No