Punjab-Haryana High Court
Kuldeep Singh vs State Of Punjab on 4 February, 2026
CRM-M-3280-2026 (O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
101
CRM-M-3280-2026 (O&M).
Date of decision: 04.02.2026.
KULDEEP SINGH
...Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB
...Respondent(s)
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ
Present :- Mr. Navjot Singh, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr. Mohit Kapoor, Sr. DAG, Punjab.
Mr. Kshitij Sharma, Sr. Advocate, with
Mr. Balwinder Singh, Advocate, and
Mr. Jagdeep Singh, Advocate,
for the complainant.
VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral)
CRM-4929-2026 Application is allowed as prayed for subject to all just exceptions. Annexures A-1 to A-5 are taken on record.
The Registry is directed to tag the same at an appropriate place.
1 of 8
::: Downloaded on - 10-02-2026 22:04:59 :::
CRM-M-3280-2026 (O&M) -2-
Main case
This is the first petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.0001 dated 10.01.2026, under Section(s) 318(4), 336(2), 336(3), 338, 340 and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, registered at Police Station NRI, District SAS Nagar, Punjab. 2 FIR in the present case was registered on the complaint made by Jaskirat Singh Tiwana son of Harwinder Singh. The translated version of the same reads thus: -
"To The ADGP, NRI Wing Punjab Police, Punjab, Respected Sir, 1. That I, Jaskirat Singh Tiwana s/o Sh. Harwinder Singh, presently residing in Canada, am an NRI and the only son and natural successor of my parents. I have come to India recently for my marriage, which is scheduled in Second week of January.2. That the property in question is situated at Village Ranghera. Khurd, Tehsil Amioh, District Fatehgarh Sahib and stands in the name of my father, Sh. Harwinder Singh. Being the only legal heir and successor, I have direct interest and responsibility in protecting the said property. The title and revenue records clearly show my father as the rightful owner. 3. Thatcertain persons, namely Kuldeep Singh s/o Swarn Singh r/o House no. 3, Ghuman Nagar, Patiala (Ph. 70870-65762) and Manpreet Singh Tiwana s/o Jarnail Singh of Village Ranghera Khurd and some unscrupulous persons have committed fraud with an intent to unlawfully take possession of our family property. These persons have prepared a forged and fabricated Agreement to Sell in respect of the above-said land. Neither I nor my father has ever signed or executed any such agreement. The same is false, forged and manufactured solely with the intention of grabbing our property. 4. That these accused persons are further extending threats to me and my family members. As I am 2 of 8 ::: Downloaded on - 10-02-2026 22:05:00 ::: CRM-M-3280-2026 (O&M) -3- currently in India for my marriage, they are trying to exploit this situation by exerting pressure on us to accept their illegal and forged claim.5. That due to these threats and fraudulent acts, I am under a serious apprehension of danger to my life and liberty, as well as to the safety and ownership of our property. Being an NRI and the only son of my parents, I am particularly vulnerable to such illegal intimidation and attempts of land grabbing 6. That the above actions constitute serious cognizable offences under the Indian Penal Code, including cheating, criminal intimidation, forgery, creation of forged documents, conspiracy, and attempts to illegally dispossess the lawful owner of the property 7. It is, therefore, most humbly requested that immediate protection of life and liberty be provided to me and my family. Strict legal action be initiated against the persons who have prepared the forged Agreement to Sell. An FIR be registered and the forged document be seized and investigated thoroughly. Protection be provided to safeguard our property from any illegal encroachment, transfer, pressure, interference. Kindly take necessary action at the earliest in the interest of justice (My father is available to record his statement on my behalf at any time, as and when required)."
3 Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner(s) contends that, having paid a substantial amount to the father of the complainant and on the refusal by the vendor to perform his part of the agreement, a suit for specific performance of the agreement was filed. Vide order dated 24.10.2025, an ex parte ad interim injunction was granted by the Civil Court, Amloh, restraining Harwinder Singh (father of the complainant) from alienating the property in question. He contends that, apprehending implication in false and baseless complaints, the petitioner approached this Court by way of CRM-M-69464- 2025, which was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 18.12.2025, 3 of 8 ::: Downloaded on - 10-02-2026 22:05:00 ::: CRM-M-3280-2026 (O&M) -4- directing the respondent-State to give a three-day advance notice to the petitioner in case his arrest was sought for in any complaint submitted by the complainant Harwinder Singh. He contends that, notwithstanding the pendency of the civil suit as well as the order passed by this Court, a case was registered against the petitioner on the complaint submitted by Jaskirat Singh Tiwana (son of Harwinder Singh) to the ADGP, S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali. The petitioner thus applied for the concession of pre-arrest bail before the Additional Sessions Judge, S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali; however, the same was dismissed vide order dated 16.01.2026. Hence, the present petition has been filed.
4 Counsel for the petitioner contends that the investigation in the present case would be based on documentary evidence and custodial interrogation of the petitioner would not be necessary. Besides, there is no possibility of the petitioner tampering with the evidence or being a flight risk. With respect to the criminal antecedents of the petitioner, he has given the following details: -
Sr. FIR No. & Police Sections Present Status No. Date Station/District 1 FIR No. 085 P.S. Bhadson, 364-A, Appeal against dated District Patiala. 149 IPC conviction pending 29.09.2006 before this Hon'ble Court vide CRA-D-
829-DB-2013.
Sentence suspended vide order dated 15.11.2013 2 FIR No. 002 P.S. Pehowa, 307, 384, Appeal against dated District 387, 506 conviction pending 02.01.2004 Kurukshetra. IPC before this Hon'ble Court vide CRA-S-
1735-SB-2007.
Sentence suspended
4 of 8
::: Downloaded on - 10-02-2026 22:05:00 :::
CRM-M-3280-2026 (O&M) -5-
vide order dated
10.02.2010
3 FIR No. 051 P.S. Sirhind, 25/54/59 Sentence undergone
dated District Arms
19.02.2004 Fatehgarh Sahib. Act
4 FIR No. 266 P.S. Sadar 25/54/59 Sentence undergone
dated Khanna, District Arms
09.11.2004 Ludhiana. Act
5 FIR No. 093 P.S. Sadar 379, 411 Sentence undergone
dated Phagwara, IPC
26.06.2005 District
Kapurthala.
6 FIR No. 159 P.S. Banga, 379 IPC Quashed by Hon'ble
dated District High Court vide
20.06.2005 Nawanshahr order dated
(SBS Nagar). 15.01.2025
7 FIR No. 143 P.S. Banga, 379 IPC Sentence undergone
dated District
05.06.2005 Nawanshahr
(SBS Nagar).
5 It is submitted that all the above-mentioned FIRs had been
registered on account of a family dispute; hence, the antecedents of the petitioner do not reflect any criminality.
6 Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-State, as well as Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant, contend that the petitioner has not made a complete and honest disclosure. It is submitted that earlier, when the petitioner approached this Court vide CRM-M-69464 of 2025, he did not disclose his criminal antecedents. Rather, he made a specific averment to the effect that he was not involved in any other case and did not have any criminal antecedents. The specific averment, on an affidavit made by the petitioner in the above petition, which was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 18.12.2025, reads thus:
5 of 8 ::: Downloaded on - 10-02-2026 22:05:00 ::: CRM-M-3280-2026 (O&M) -6-
"16. That the petitioner has a clean past, is not involved in any criminal case and is having movable/ immovable properties and therefore, he is not likely to flee justice if granted anticipatory bail by this Hon'ble Court.
17. That the petitioner has not been involved in any other case."
7 It is contended that the petitioner thus concealed his criminal antecedents to secure an order in his favour. It has been vehemently argued that Harwinder Singh (father of the complainant) had filed a complaint on 31.10.2025, for having been defrauded by the petitioner, in collusion with others. The petitioner impersonated as a Clerk to an Advocate of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in connection with a pending case wherein the father of the complainant is one of the respondents and forged the documents. It is contended that the petitioner had also filed a civil suit for recovery on the ground that a complaint had been submitted by Harwinder Singh. 8 I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties and have gone through the documents appended along with the present petition.
9 It is evident that there are specific allegations against the petitioner of conspiring with his co-accused Manpreet Singh to prepare a forged and fabricated agreement to sell dated 22.11.2024 to grab the property of Harwinder Singh, father of the complainant. It has also surfaced that the petitioner got transferred an amount of Rs.40,000/- in his Google Pay account from the father of the complainant by reporting himself to be a Clerk of the Advocate on the pretext that the said amount of Rs.40,000/- had to be paid to the Advocate as a legal fee. The papers that were signed by Harwinder Singh at the time of the case were thereafter misused in the preparation of the 6 of 8 ::: Downloaded on - 10-02-2026 22:05:00 ::: CRM-M-3280-2026 (O&M) -7- agreement to sell. It has been informed by the State counsel that, as a matter of fact, as many as nine FIRs were registered against the petitioner, of which he was acquitted in one. Further, the petitioner was convicted in FIR No.93 dated 26.06.2005 for the commission of an offence under Sections 379 and 411 of the IPC, registered at Police Station Sadar, Phagwara, vide judgment dated 16.07.2021. In the application filed for anticipatory bail in FIR No.93 dated 26.06.2005, registered under Sections 379 and 411 IPC at Police Station, Phagwara, the petitioner himself stated that he was declared a proclaimed offender on 20.03.2007 in the said FIR. It is thus evident that the petitioner has not disclosed the above specific information to mislead the Court for a favourable order.
10 Withholding of the criminal antecedents and filing the pleadings, supported by an affidavit, contrary to the facts, is a clear attempt to mislead this Court. This Court takes serious exception to the acts of the petitioner in having filed incorrect pleadings before this Court in the earlier round of litigation, which stands contradicted in the present CRM-M-3280-2026 and counsel for the petitioner acknowledges that the averments contained in paras No. 16 and 17 of the CRM-M-69464-2025 were incorrect. 11 The position in law is well settled that a person who seeks equity and indulgence from Court has to approach the Court of law with clean hands. 12 Taking into consideration that the petitioner has been playing hide and seek with the process of law, this Court is not inclined to extend the concession of pre-arrest bail in favour of the petitioner. The present petition is accordingly dismissed.
7 of 8
::: Downloaded on - 10-02-2026 22:05:00 :::
CRM-M-3280-2026 (O&M) -8-
CRM-3142-2026
13 Since the main case itself has been decided, the present
application seeking preponement of the date of hearing is disposed of as having been rendered infructuous.
February 04, 2026. (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ)
raj arora JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
8 of 8
::: Downloaded on - 10-02-2026 22:05:00 :::