Punjab-Haryana High Court
Amanpreet Kaur Alias Amanpreet Nat vs State Of Punjab And Another on 15 October, 2025
216
CRM-M-54194-2025 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-54194-2025
Date of decision: 15.10.2025
AMANPREET KAUR @ AMANPREET NAT ....Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. ....Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL
Present:- Mr. S.S. Rangi, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Ravinder Singh, DAG Punjab.
Mr. P.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate for the complainant.
.....
RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J. (ORAL)
1. Through the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short "BNSS"), the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No.82 dated 12.09.2025 under Sections 316(2), 318(4) and 61(2) of BNS, registered at Police Station Mulepur, Fatehgarh Sahib.
2. On 24.09.2025, following order had been passed: -
" Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.82 dated 12.09.2025 registered under Sections 316(2), 318(4) and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, at Police Station Mulepur, District Fatehgarh Sahib.
Brief facts as per the prosecution case are that the petitioner in connivance with co-accused have committed cheating by failing to honour the agreement to sell and by executing the sale deed in favour of third party. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He argued that it is the complainant himself who has failed to 1 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 14-11-2025 23:38:16 ::: 216 CRM-M-54194-2025 -2- perform the part of the agreement. It is further argued that the petitioner specially returned from the USA on 12.08.2025 to execute the sale deed and remained present before the office of the Joint Sub-Registrar, on 14.08.2025 from 9:00 am. to 5:00p.m, however, the complainant did not appear. In support of this argument, he has placed on record Annexure P-4 i.e. affidavit submitted before the SubRegistrar to mark her presence. He further argued that a legal notice dated 19.08.2025 (Annexure P-5) was also sent to the complainant declaring that the earnest money stood forfeited and the agreement to sell dated 20.12.2024 stood cancelled and subsequently, the petitioner along with her mother had sold the property to a third party, vide sale deed dated 11.09.2025. It is submitted that the present FIR is abuse of process of law and the matter is of civil nature. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation as and when called upon to do so by the investigating agency.
In support of his arguments, learned counsel has placed reliance in the case of 'Sharif Ahmed and another vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and another' 2024 INSC 363, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under:
".... Any effort to settle civil disputes and claims which do not involve any criminal offence, by applying pressure through criminal prosecution should be deprecated and discouraged".
Further, reliance is also placed upon in the case of 'Jayshree and another vs. State of Rajasthan and another' (Criminal Appeal Nos. 1640-1641 of 2024, decided on 02.07.2024), wherein it was held as under: "Prima facie, in our opinion, breach of contract does not amount to an offence under Section 420 or Section 406 of the IPC unless fraudulent or dishonest intention is shown right at the beginning of the transaction. This Court has time and again cautioned against converting purely civil disputes into criminal cases. Any effort to settle civil disputes and claims, which do not involve any criminal offence, by applying pressure through criminal prosecution should be deprecated and discouraged."
Notice of motion.
On asking of the Court, Mr. Jatinder Pal Singh, Sr. DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.1-State and seeks time to file status report in the matter.
At this stage, Mr. P.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate and Mr. Dev Ahlawat, Advocate have put in appearance on behalf of respondent No.2/complainant and filed Vakalatnama, which is taken on record. He, while opposing the petition for anticipatory bail, has contended that the petitioner has cheated the complainant to the tune of Rs.1,25,00,000/-. He further argued that the present petitioner never intended to execute the sale deed whereas the 2 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 14-11-2025 23:38:17 ::: 216 CRM-M-54194-2025 -3- complainant was always ready and willing to perform his part of the agreement. He further argued that as per the agreement, all communications were to be made through e-mail but the present petitioner never informed the complainant to come present before the Sub-Registrar on 14.08.2025. It is further argued that legal notice dated 19.08.2025 was sent on a wrong address and that the subsequent execution of sale deed in favour of third party on 11.09.2025 demonstrates the petitioner's dishonest intention from beginning and, thus, she does not deserve the concession of bail.
Adjourned to 15.10.2025.
In the meantime, the petitioner is directed to join investigation within a week from today and would appear as and when required by the Investigating Officer and cooperate with the Investigating Agency. In the event of arrest, she shall be admitted to interim bail on furnishing of bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of the order dated 24.09.2025 passed by this Court, the petitioner has joined the investigation.
4. Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Amarjeet Singh has submitted that the petitioner has joined the investigation and is no longer required for further investigation.
5. In view of the statement made by learned State counsel, the interim order dated 24.09.2025 is made absolute. The petitioner shall continue to join investigation, as and when called by the Investigating Officer and shall also abide by the conditions as provided under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
(RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL)
15.10.2025 JUDGE
puneet
i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No
ii) Whether reportable? Yes/No
3 of 3
::: Downloaded on - 14-11-2025 23:38:17 :::