Punjab-Haryana High Court
Jagtar Singh vs State Of Punjab on 21 July, 2026
Author: Jasjit Singh Bedi
Bench: Jasjit Singh Bedi
CRM-M-26710-2026 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-26710-2026
Date of decision: 21.07.2026
Uploaded on: 21.07.2026
JAGTAR SINGH
... Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF U.T. CHANDIGARH & ANOTHER
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI
Present: Mr. R.S. Waraich (Rana), Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. J.S. Toor, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. Adhiraj Toor, Advocate
for the respondent No.1/U.T., Chandigarh.
Ms. Taranjot Kaur, respondent No.2-in-person.
****
JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J.
The prayer in the present petition under Section 482 of
BNSS, 2023 is for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case
FIR No.0030 dated 16.02.2026 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections
419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, 1860 (Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338,
336(3), 340(2), 61 of BNS, 2023) at Police Station Central Sector 17,
U.T., Chandigarh.
2. A reply dated 08.05.2026 has been filed on behalf of the
petitioner by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The same is taken on
record.
JITESH LAL
2026.07.21 16:46
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM-M-26710-2026 -2-
3. The present FIR came to be registered at the instance of
Taranjot Kaur D/o late Sh. Hardial Singh Sekhon and the same reads as
under:-
Sir, It is requested that one complaint No.ICMS/2025/043444
dated 19/12/2025 filed by Taranjot Kaur D/o Late Sh.Hardial
Singh Sekhon, resident of H.No.2792, Sector-7, Sector 62,
SAS Nagar, Pb. Against Jagtar Singh and etc. was
investigated by Police Station, which is as follows:- To 1.the
senior superintendent of Police, Chandigarh. 2.The Station
House Officer, Police Station, Sector 3, Chandigarh. Sub:-
Complaint against accused persons namely (1) Jagtar Singh
aged about 57 years S/o Sh. Amar Singh R/o House No. 276,
Darshan Avenue, Sultanwind, Amritsar (Pb.), Aadhaar Card
No. 6772-6158-4039, Mobile No. 99148-14863 and
impersonator (2) Taranjot Kaur R/o House No.579, Garden
Enclave, GT Road, Bypass, Amritsar and all the persons who
are involved in the fraud and producing false documents
pertaining to House No. 53, Sector 8-A, Chandigarh in the
Court under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B
along with other relevant Sections of IPC and BNS 2023. Sir,
1.That the above said complaint is being filed by Taranjot
Kaur D/o late Sh. Hardial Singh Sekhon and legal heir of late
Smt. Gurdip Kaur R/o House No. 2792, Phase-7, Sector 62,
SAS Nagar, Mohali. 2. That case pertains to the fraud
committed pertaining House No.53, Sector 8-A, Chandigarh.
3. That the applicant came to know about the case titled as
Jagtar Singh Vs. Gurdeep Kaur and another was filed by
Jagtar Singh when the applicant went to Estate Office, U.T.
Chandigarh on 21.04.2025 along with her Advocate namely
Ms. Reeta Shinghari where some unknown persons and
property dealers were there to inspect the same file and
informed the applicant that Sh. Jagtar Singh had already
JITESH LAL
2026.07.21 16:46
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM-M-26710-2026 -3-purchased the above said property from the mother of the
applicant Smt. Gurdip Kaur. The applicant was given the
photocopy of the civil suit filed by the Jagtar Singh and the
applicant was asked to sell the above said property to Jagtar
Singh or to face dire consequences. Thus, the applicant came
to know that some unknown person using forged documents
and filed a civil suit before Dr. Parikshit Sharma, Civil Judge
(Junior Division), Chandigarh, to grab the property of the
applicant. The copy of the civil suit along with the annexures
are enclosed as Annexure A-1/1. 4. That some lady
impersonator as Taranjot Kaur has also submitted some
documents before the Estate Officer, U.T. Chandigarh in the
year 2019 pertaining to the transfer of the above said
property where the above said impersonator Taranjot Kaur
shown her address as R/o House No. 579, Garden Enclave,
GT Road, Bypass, Amritsar. It is worth mentioning here the
plaintiff Jagtar Singh has also shown his address as House
No. 276, Darshan Avenue, Sultanwind, Amritsar, Punjab. This
shows that Jagtar Singh and impersonator Taranjot Kaur who
has given her address in the Estate Office, U.T. Chandigarh
as R/o Amritsar as mentioned above is having connivance
with Jagtar Singh to grab the property of the applicant
Taranjot Kaur. The applicant immediately filed an application
before the Estate Officer, U.T. Chandigarh on 21.04.2025
informing that some fraud is being committed as the applicant
along with her brother has already applied for the transfer of
said property in their names being the legal heirs of Smt.
Gurdip Kaur W/o Sh. Hardial Singh Sekhon but the property
was not transferred as in the website it was being shown as
resumed and in the year 2025 the website was updated and
the resumption order has been set aside by the Estate Officer,
U.T. Chandigarh. The applicant also informed the Estate
Officer, U.T. Chandigarh that her brother has already
expired, so the applicant was informed that the fresh
JITESH LAL
2026.07.21 16:46
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM-M-26710-2026 -4-application for the transfer has to be submitted. The applicant
requested the E.O., U.T. Chandigarh not to supply any
documents to any person except the applicant and not to
allow any person to check and inspect the file. The file was
immediately ordered to be sealed by the Estate Officer, U.T.
Chandigarh. The application dated 21.04.2025 moved by the
applicant before the Estate Officer, U.T. Chandigarh is
enclosed as Annexure A-1. 5. That the House No. 53, Sector
8-A, Chandigarh was originally allotted in the name of Smt.
Varyam Kaur W/o Sh. Hardial Singh Guram and after death
of late Smt. Varyam Kaur on 08.12.1996 the above said
property was transferred in favour of her daughter Smt.
Gurdip Kaur. 6. That Smt. Gurdip Kaur was posted as IAS
Officer in various capacities in the State of Punjab and she
retired on 31.01.1996 from the post of Chairperson of School
and Colleges Tribunal. 7. That applicant father, namely Sh.
Hardial Singh Sekhon was an IPS Officer and late Sh.
Hardial Singh Sekhon expired during service. The applicant
father was lastly posted as Inspector General of Police,
Computerization, in Chandigarh. 8. That the above said
property was transferred in favour of Mrs. Gurdip Kaur
Sekhon wife of late Sh. Hardial Singh Sekhon. The copy of the
transfer letter dated 24.01.1997 is enclosed as Annexure A/2.
9. That Mrs. Gurdip Kaur W/o Sh. Hardial Singh Sekhon
expired on 22.11.2001. The copy of the death certificate of
late Smt. Gurdip Kaur is enclosed as Annexure A-3. 10. That
late Smt. Gurdip Kaur has two legal heirs i.e. applicant Ms.
Taranjot Kaur D/o late Sh. Hardial Singh Sekhon and late Sh.
Lajeshwar Singh, who has already expired on 13.07.2023.
The copy of the death certificate of late Sh. Lajeshwar Singh
is enclosed as Annexure A-4. 11. That late Sh. Lajeshwar
Singh has following legal heirs: a. Navdeep Kaur (wife) b.
Eveleen Kaur (daughter) 12. That the applicant along with
her said brother applied for the transfer of property in their
JITESH LAL
2026.07.21 16:46
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM-M-26710-2026 -5-
names vide application No. 119703 dated 20.02.2013. The
copy of the application No. 119703 dated 20.02.2013 is
enclosed as Annexure A-5. 13. That the address of the
applicant has been wrongly given by Jagtar Singh as R/o
House No. 53, Sector 8-A, Chandigarh as Mrs. Gurdip Kaur
through legal heir Taranjot Kaur, as the above said house has
already been rented out to the Government Department i.e.
Food Corporation of India which has been let out by the
grandmother of the applicant namely Smt. Varyam Kaur since
the year 1985 and till date Food Corporation of India is in
the possession of the tenanted premises. The applicant is
residing at House No. 2792, Phase-7, Sector 61, SAS Nagar,
Mohali, Punjab from the last 27 years. 14. That the applicant
is placing on record the lease agreement executed with Food
Corporation of India dated 15.10.1985 between Smt. Varyam
Kaur, Court Guardian of Ms. Taranjot Kaur (applicant) with
Food Corporation of India. The copy of the lease agreement
dated 15.10.1985 is enclosed as Annexure A-6. 15. That when
the summons were sent to the applicant they were never
received and summons were received back unserved as the
applicant in question was never residing in the above said
house. 16. That the plaintiff in order to play the fraud
informed the court that defendant No.1 late Smt. Gurdip Kaur
since deceased has expired, was impleaded through her sole
legal heir namely impersonator Taranjot Kaur and the said
impersonator Taranjot Kaur had already expired on
17.10.2024 and also informed that Taranjot Kaur does not
have any legal heirs and placed on record the copy of the
death certificate dated 16.11.2024 of the impersonator
Taranjot Kaur. The copy of the zimni order dated 29.01.2025
is enclosed as Annexure A-7. Thereafter, the case was
adjourned to 07.04.2025. 17. That copy of the death
certificate of impersonator Taranjot Kaur dated 17.10.2024 is
enclosed as Annexure A-8 where the address of impersonator
JITESH LAL
2026.07.21 16:46
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM-M-26710-2026 -6-
Taranjot Kaur has been shown as House No. 856, Lalheri
Road, Hardev Nagar, Khanna, Ludhiana. 18. That Jagtar
Singh has committed a fraud which is very much clear that at
the time of filing of the case address of the Taranjot Kaur has
been mentioned as House No. 53, Sector 8-A. Chandigarh
and while producing the death certificate of impersonator
Taranjot Kaur where the permanent address has been
mentioned as House No.205, Tehsil Khanna, District
Ludhiana. This clearly shows that heinous crime has been
committed by the Jagtar Singh in order to grab the property
of the applicant Taranjot Kaur. 19. That applicant is also
placing on record photocopy of attested copy of her affidavit
dated 03.06.2015 where it has been mentioned that the
applicant is also known by the name Slony Taranjot Kaur
daughter of Sh. Hardial Singh R/o House No. 2792, Phase-7,
Mohali. It has also been mentioned that Slony Taranjot Kaur
and Taranjot Kaur is one and the same person. The copy of
the affidavit dated 03.06.2015 attested before Executive
Magistrate, District SAS Nagar, Mohali is enclosed as
Annexure A-9. 20. That the applicant is placing on record her
copy of Aadhaar Card where it has been categorically
mentioned D/o Sh. Hardial Singh R/o House No. 2792,
Phase-7, Sector 61, SAS Nagar, Mohali, Punjab and the date
of birth of the applicant has been shown as 26.09.1973. The
copy of Aadhaar Card of the applicant Taranjot Kaur is
enclosed as Annexure A-10. The copy of the PAN card of
applicant Taranjot Kaur is enclosed as Annexure A-11. The
copy of the driving license of applicant Taranjot Kaur is
enclosed as Annexure A-12. The copy of the Voter Identity
Card of applicant Taranjot Kaur is enclosed as Annexure
A-13. 21. That applicant is also placing on record copy of her
Passport dated 17.08.1987 where the name of the applicant
has been mentioned as Slony Taranjot Kaur and father name
has been mentioned as Hardial Singh and mother name has
JITESH LAL
2026.07.21 16:46
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM-M-26710-2026 -7-
been mentioned as G.K. Sekhon and address has been
mentioned as R/o House No. 53, Sector 8-A, Chandigarh and
in the column particulars of relative/friend to be intimated in
event of death or accident has been mentioned as G.K.
Sekhon, House No. 53, Sector 8, Chandigarh. The copy of the
passport dated 17.08.1987 of applicant Slony Taranjot Kaur
@Taranjot Kaur is enclosed as Annexure A-14. 22. That
applicant is also placing on record copy of Passport dated
24.08.1987 of her mother Smt. Gurdip Kaur Sekhon where the
husband’s name of Smt. Gurdip Kaur Sekhon has been shown
as Sardar Hardial Singh and address has been shown as
House No. 53, Sector 8-A, Chandigarh. The copy of the
passport dated 24.08.1987 of late Smt. Gurdip Kaur Sekhon
mother of applicant Taranjot Kaur is enclosed as Annexure
A-15. 23. That applicant Taranjot Kaur has done her
graduation from Stanford University, USA. Now, the applicant
Taranjot Kaur is presently posted in the Government
Department as Deputy Manager, Director General School
Education, Punjab located at Phase-VIII, Mohali. The
certificate of Matriculation of Taranjot Kaur dated March
1988 is enclosed as Annexure A-16. The Bachelor Degree in
Arts and Communication of the applicant Taranjot Kaur is
enclosed as Annexure A-17. 24. That applicant is also placing
on record Passport dated 17.08.1987 of late Sh. Lajeshwar
Singh, brother of applicant Taranjot Kaur. In the said
passport, father name has been mentioned as Hardial Singh
and mother name has been mentioned as G.K. Sekhon and
Permanent Address has been mentioned as House No. 53,
Sector 8-A, Chandigarh. The copy of the passport dated
17.08.1987 of late Sh. Lajeshwar Singh brother of applicant
Taranjot Kaur is enclosed as Annexure A-18. 25. That
applicant is also placing on record Aadhaar Card of her
brother Lajeshwar Singh S/o Sh. Hardial Singh where the
address of late Lajeshwar Singh has been mentioned as
JITESH LAL
2026.07.21 16:46
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM-M-26710-2026 -8-
House No. 2792, Phase-7, Sector 61, SAS Nagar Mohali. The
copy of the Aadhaar Card, PAN card and Voter ID Card of
Lajeshwar Singh brother of applicant Taranjot Kaur are
enclosed as Annexure A-19 (Colly). The copy of the Aadhaar
Card of Navdeep Kaur (wife of late Lajeshwar Singh) and
Aadhaar Card of Eveleen Kaur Sekhon (daughter of late
Lajeshwar Singh) are enclosed as Annexure A-20 (Colly). 26.
The applicant is also placing on record photograph of her
father late Sh. Hardial Singh Sekhon, IPS in uniform.
Photograph of mother along with family photographs of
brother and sister and grandmother is enclosed as Annexure
A-21. 27. That applicant is also placing on record the death
certificate of her grandmother Smt. Varyam Kaur where the
husband name has been mentioned as Hardial Singh Guram
where date of death is showing as 08.12.1996. The copy of the
death certificate of late Smt. Varyam Kaur is enclosed as
Annexure A-22. Thus, it is not possible that Smt. Varyam Kaur
had signed agreement to sell dated 14.03.1999 and its receipt
dated 01.01.2000, receipt dated 08.12.2000 and payment
receipt dated 08.01.2001 Annexure A-1 (Colly) with the suit
filed by Jagtar Singh as Smt. Varyam Kaur has already
expired on 08.12.1996. This clearly shows that a fraud has
been committed by Jagtar Singh. That applicant is also
placing on record the death certificate of her grandfather
Hardial Singh S/o Sh. Narain Singh and the date of death is
shown as 11.09.1982 and address of her grandfather has been
shown as House No. 53, Sector 8-A, Chandigarh. The copy of
the death certificate of late grandfather of applicant Taranjot
Kaur namely Hardial Singh 5/o Sh. Narain Singh is enclosed
as Annexure A-23. 29. That applicant is also placing on
record death certificate of her father H.S. Sekhon S/o Sh.
Gopal Singh and date of death is shown as 08.06.1986. The
copy of the death certificate of father of applicant Taranjot
Kaur namely H.S. Sekhon S/o Sh. Gopal Singh is enclosed as
JITESH LAL
2026.07.21 16:46
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM-M-26710-2026 -9-
Annexure A-24. 30. That the applicant is also submitting the
photocopy of her passport issued on 22.01.1997 which
expired on 21.01.2017. The photocopy of the passport of
applicant Slony Taranjot Kaur dated 22.01.1997 is enclosed
as Annexure A-25. 31. That earlier applicant was residing
with her parents at House No. 53, Sector 5, Chandigarh ie.
House allotted by the Government of Punjab, Chandigarh
when her mother was posted as an IAS Officer. It is worth
mentioning here that Smt. Gurdip Kaur was residing in the
above said house for the last 17 years till her retirement. 32.
That applicant went to the USA in the year 1992 and then
again returned back in the year 1993 as her grandmother was
unwell and after her death in the year 1996 the applicant
again went to USA in the year 1998. The applicant returned
to India in the month of October 2001 from USA after the
terrorist attack of 9/11 in USA. 33. That it is worth
mentioning here that one lady alleged to be Taranjot Kaur
and alleged to be D/o Sh. Hardial Singh Sekhon has filed an
application in the Estate Officer, U.T. Chandigarh in the year
2019 requesting to transfer the property in her name. 34. That
this clearly shows that applicant Taranjot Kaur is the real
daughter of late Smt. Gurdip Kaur and forgery has been
committed by Jagtar Singh and his associates by filing the
frivolous suit before this Hon’ble Court on the basis of forged
sale agreement. 35.That this clearly shows that a heinous
crime has been committed by the plaintiff by way of
impersonation by producing the death certificate of some
other Taranjot Kaur having address i.e. House No. 856,
Lalheri Road Hardev Nagar Khanna, Ludhiana and given the
statement in the Hon’ble Court that Taranjot Kaur had
already expired and having no other legal heir and also
produced forged agreement to sell alleged to be executed by
the mother of the applicant Smt. Gurdip Kaur and further
agreement alleged to be executed by applicant Taranjot Kaur.
JITESH LAL
2026.07.21 16:46
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM-M-26710-2026 -10-
It is further respectfully submitted here that the plaintiff has
also got filed application by some other impersonator
Taranjot Kaur in the year 2019 having address in Amritsar.
Thus, all these persons have committed fraud with the Court
as well as with the applicant by producing false and
fabricated documents in the Court also by way of fraud, by
impersonating some other person as Taranjot Kaur. Thus,
Jagtar Singh has hatched criminal conspiracy. Thus, from all
the facts, it is crystal clear that false agreement to sell and
receipts have been executed by Jagtar Singh just to grab the
property and also by producing some unknown person as
Taranjot Kaur. 36. That it is worth mentioning here that
Aadhaar Card of the lady alleged to be Taranjot Kaur has
been attached in the Estate Officer, U.T. Chandigarh which
shows that her year of birth is 1945 which is not possible as
father of original Taranjot Kaur, DOB was 15.03.1937. It is
not possible that father of the applicant was 08 years old
when alleged Taranjot Kaur was born. 37. That Jagtar Singh
has not mentioned the mother’s name of impersonator
Taranjot Kaur to prove her identity. It is worth mentioning
here that when the civil suit has been filed by Sh. Jagtar
Singh where they have shown that Taranjot Kaur has expired
and mentioned that she was not having any legal heirs so the
property should be decreed in their favour. This clearly shows
that Jagtar Singh and her impersonator lady alleged to be
Taranjot Kaur has played a fraud with the court also as well
as with the Government Office ie. Estate Officer, U.T.
Chandigarh to grab the property of the applicant and address
of both the persons have been mentioned as resident of
Amritsar. 38. That Sh. Jagtar Singh has very cleverly
manipulated the things and has wrongly mentioned in the
court that impersonator Taranjot Kaur has expired and
having no legal heirs so the above said property should be
transferred in his name on the basis of the forged documents.
JITESH LAL
2026.07.21 16:46
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM-M-26710-2026 -11-
39. That no document has been produced by impersonator
Taranjot Kaur as well as Jagtar Singh showing that alleged
Taranjot Kaur was the daughter of Gurdip Kaur and
granddaughter of Varyam Kaur. 40. That the applicant is also
placing on record the decision on LPA No. 646 of 1989, in
which Smt. Kartar Kaur widow of Sh. Gopal Singh, i.e. Dadi
ji and Sh. Iqbal Singh S/o Sh. Gopal Singh, i.e. Tayaji of the
applicant, filed case against mother of the applicant Smt.
Gurdip Kaur Sekhon, Rajashwar Singh (brother) and
applicant Taranjot Kaur (minor) through Smt. Varyam Kaur,
her grandmother (Respondents). Case pertained to the
intense dispute of the Will of Sh. Hardial Singh Sekhon (father
of the applicant), which was decided in favour of the
respondents Gurdip Kaur Sekhon and others. The copy of the
order dated 03.07.2009 passed in LPA No. 646 of 1989 in
case titled as Kartar Kaur and another Vs. Gurdeep Kaur
Sekhon & others is enclosed as Annexure A-26. 41. That
applicant Taranjot Kaur is having the apprehension that her
Tayaji’s son namely Khushpal Singh @ Lali S/o Sh. Iqbal
Singh Sekhon R/o Wadala House, Azad Nagar, G.T. Road,
Amritsar is behind the fraud committed by Jagtar Singh and
other persons, as Sh. Khushpal Singh @ Lali earlier also has
been threatening the applicant and her family with dire
consequences for the past many years, with the objective of
forcing her to transfer in his name the ancestral properties
located at Amritsar, which were left behind by the applicant
Taranjot Kaur’s father. So much so that the applicant and her
family did not visit their ancestral home and land located at
Amritsar for past many years out of fear and threat from
Khushpal Singh S/o Iqbal Singh Sekhon and his partners. It is
worth mentioning here that the applicant’s family is being
harassed since the LPA No. 646 of 1989 titled as Kartar Kaur
and others Vs. Gurdip Kaur Sekhon was filed, and the
harassment increased when the case was decided on
JITESH LAL
2026.07.21 16:46
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM-M-26710-2026 -12-
03.07.2009 in favour of the applicant and against Smt. Kartar
Kaur and Iqbal Singh, Le. Dadi ji and Taya ji of the applicant
Taranjot Kaur. 42. That applicant Taranjot Kaur and her
family are also having threat to their lives as the applicant
was threatened by Khushpal Singh @ Lali and his two sons
and wife. Applicant has the apprehension that Jagtar Singh is
a front-man working at the behest of Khushpal Singh @ Lali.
It is also pointed out that if anything happens to the applicant
or her family, then all these persons and other persons
involved in the present fraud will be solely responsible for the
same. 43 That Jagtar Singh along with connivance of all
above persons has submitted fabricated documents before the
Court of Dr. Parikshit Sharma, Civil Judge (Junior Division),
Chandigarh, where the forged signatures of Smt. Gurdip
Kaur, Smt.Taranjot Kaur (applicant) and grandmother of
applicant Smt. Varyam Kaur, are placed on the alleged to be
executed agreement to sell and on the alleged receipts,
whereas the various documents produced by the applicant
Taranjot Kaur show that the actual signatures of Smt. Gurdip
Kaur and applicant Taranjot Kaur are entirely different.
Moreover, Smt. Varyam Kaur had already expired on
08.12.1996. This clearly shows that a fraud has been
committed by Jagtar Singh as he produced the forged
documents before the Court in order to grab the property of
the applicant and also filed false and fabricated documents
before the Estate Officer, U.T. Chandigarh pertaining to the
above said property alleging that the above said property has
been purchased by Jagtar Singh. 44. That thumb impression
of Taranjot Kaur has been appended on the alleged
agreement to sell and whereas applicant Taranjot Kaur used
to sign the documents and her signature has been mentioned
in various documents produced before the Court of Dr.
Parikshit Sharma, Civil Judge (Junior Division), Chandigarh.
This clearly shows that applicant Taranjot Kaur used to sign
JITESH LAL
2026.07.21 16:46
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM-M-26710-2026 -13-
with her signatures. Moreover, it is crystal clear that when the
alleged agreement to sell produced by Jagtar Singh in the
Court was signed dated 14.03.1999, the applicant Taranjot
Kaur was in USA for higher studies and living at Stanford
University, California. Moreover, when the alleged receipts
were signed as a witness by the applicant Taranjot Kaur on
01.01.2000 and 08.12.2000 and 08.01.2001, the applicant
Taranjot Kaur was not in India as she was pursuing her
graduation degree in Stanford University, USA. Moreover,
Smt. Varyam Kaur had already expired on 08.12.1996, so it is
not possible for Smt. Varyam Kaur to sign as a witness on
14.03.1999, 01.01.2000, 08.12.2000 and on 08.01.2001. 45.
That the DL of applicant Taranjot Kaur is also enclosed,
where her signatures can be seen. Applicant Taranjot Kaur
used to sign in full signatures and never imposed thumb
impression, and the signatures of her mother Gurdip Kaur
Sekhon were also forged in the alleged document as the
original signatures of Smt. Gurdip Kaur Sekhon are visible in
her passport. Moreover, there are thousands of documents
where mother of the applicant late Smt. Gurdip Kaur Sekhon
signed in her capacity as an IAS Officer in different
departments wherever she was posted. 46. That it is worth
mentioning here that the alleged agreement to sell is alleged
to be executed on 14.03.1999 and the present suit has been
filed on 21.11.2023 i.e. after a gap of 23 years. Moreover, it is
not possible that Rs. 1,35,00,000/- alleged to be paid to late
Smt. Gurdip Kaur (mother of the applicant Taranjot Kaur)
and to the applicant was given totally in cash and Jagtar
Singh has not produced any document to prove the
transactions. 47. Applicant also has the apprehension that
Khushpal Singh, Jagtar Singh and others have fraudulently
obtained the personal identity documents of applicant
Taranjot Kaur, i.e. Aadhaar card, PAN card, etc. from some
sources and are in the process of misusing the same to grab
JITESH LAL
2026.07.21 16:46
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM-M-26710-2026 -14-
her property. This is corroborated from the fact that applicant
Taranjot Kaur received OTPs on her Aadhaar registered
mobile number for updating her Aadhaar information,
without her having initiated any such activity. She received 2
such OTPs on 31.10.2024 and another 2 such OTPs on
17.12.2024. Copy of the 2 OTPs dated 31.10.2024 and 2
OTPs dated 17.12.2024 is attached as ANNEXURE A-27.
Fearing fraud, the applicant immediately informed the UIDAI
helpline by sending e-mails dated 31.10.2024 and 20.12.2024
to [email protected], and also took legal remedy. The e-mails
are attached as ANNEXURE A-28. However, these persons
need to be restrained from using the applicant’s identification
documents with the intent to defraud her. 48. That Jagtar
Singh has hatched a criminal conspiracy with other persons
by producing forged documents pertaining to agreement to
sell and forged receipts and also impersonating some other
person as Taranjot Kaur for the purpose of cheating and used
the forged documents as genuine. There are direct allegations
of forgery and cheating made out against Jagtar Singh and
other persons involved in this matter and thus, committed a
heinous offence. There is ample evidence on record against
Jagtar Singh in this relevant connection. Keeping in view the
present facts and circumstances, an FIR may kindly be
registered under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B
along with other relevant Sections of IPC and BNS 2023
against above named persons immediately or any other
person involved with Jagtar Singh in committing the offence.
Dated:- 6/06/2025 Complainant (Signed: Taranjot Kaur)
(Taranjot Kaur) D/o late Sh. Hardial Singh Sekhon and legal
heir i.e. daughter of late Smt. Gurdip Kaur R/o House No.
2792, Phase-7, Sector 62, SAS Nagar Mohali. M: 93161-
32654.”
JITESH LAL
2026.07.21 16:46
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM-M-26710-2026 -15-
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR has
been registered at the instance of one Taranjot Kaur who is an Imposter
and there is a serious dispute regarding her identity, addresses and
documents. Taranjot Kaur has filed an application in a civil suit for
permanent injunction filed by the petitioner for impleading her as well as
Gurdip Kaur and Eveleen Kaur Sekhon as defendants which application
is pending adjudication. There is a gap of 4 years between the
complainant taking her matriculation and her Sr. Secondary Certificate
examination. It is a civil dispute which has been given the colour of a
criminal offence which is impermissible in law. As the case is based on
documentary evidence which are in possession of the Investigating
Agency, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required and
therefore, he is entitled to the concession of anticipatory bail.
5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for respondent
No.1/U.T., Chandigarh contends that one Varyam Kaur was the owner of
the property in question bearing House No.53, Sector 8-A, Chandigarh,
the value of which is about Rs.100 crores. Varyam Kaur who died on
08.12.1996 had a daughter namely, Gurdip Kaur Sekhon who was an
IAS Officer married to Hardial Singh Sekhon who was serving in the
police. The property was inherited by Gurdip Kaur Sekhon. Gurdip Kaur
Sekhon passed on 22.11.2001 whereas Hardial Singh Sekhon passed
away on 08.06.1986. Their legal heirs are their daughter Taranjot Kaur
alias Slony Taranjot Kaur, the present complainant currently residing at
JITESH LAL
2026.07.21 16:46
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM-M-26710-2026 -16-
House No.2792, Phase-VII, Sector 61, SAS Nagar, Mohali and son
Lajeshwar Singh who passed away on 13.09.2023 leaving behind his
wife Navdip Kaur and daughter Eveleen Kaur. The learned Senior
counsel contends that the suit filed by the petitioner for permanent
injunction is based on fabricated documents. The agreement to sell dated
29.09.1998 (Annexure R-1) purportedly executed by Gurdip Kaur
Sekhon in favour of the petitioner is dated 29.09.1998. It is witnessed by
Varyam Kaur, the mother of Gurdip Kaur who died much earlier on
18.12.1996. It is allegedly thumb marked by Taranjot Kaur who as per
her passport and travel documents was in the U.S.A. pursuing higher
studies. The petitioner produced receipts dated 14.03.1993, 01.01.2000,
08.12.2000 and 08.01.2001 all purportedly bearing the signatures/thumb
impressions of complainant/Taranjot Kaur and her grandmother Smt.
Varyam Kaur as witnesses but Taranjot Kaur was studying abroad on all
the given dates between 29.09.1998 to 08.01.2001. Apparently, the
signatures/thumb impressions of both the witnesses appearing upon the
aforesaid documents prima facie appear to be forged and fabricated. A
bare perusal and comparison of the signatures of Gurdip Kaur Sekhon as
appearing on her passport (Annexure R-6) with the signatures on the
agreement to sell would show that her signatures have been fabricated.
The petitioner has prepared another forged agreement between himself
and the complainant dated 23.12.2019 in which the complainant has
allegedly acknowledged the agreement of the petitioner with her mother
dated 29.09.1998 stating that she had no objection regarding the transfer
JITESH LAL
2026.07.21 16:46
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM-M-26710-2026 -17-
of his property in his favour. This has been done so as to cover up the
factum of delay of 20 years in filing a suit. The petitioner has also
produced a death certificate of the complainant before the Civil Court
showing her to have expired on 17.10.2024 and having no legal heirs.
This purported death certificate of Taranjot Kaur has been procured on
the basis of incorrect facts and by hoodwinking authorities and is being
used to create false evidence before the Court to grab the property in
question. Apparently, there are other persons who are in conspiracy with
the present petitioner. A perusal of the letter dated 15.07.2019 submitted
to the Estate Office by some women impersonating the complainant
calling herself Taranjot Kaur daughter of Hardial Singh Sekhon reflects
her date of birth as 01.01.1945. The date of birth mentioned in the
passport of Gurdip Kaur Sekhon is 03.01.1938. If this be so then
Imposter Taranjot Kaur was born only 7 years after the birth of her
mother Gurdip Kaur Sekhon which is biologically impossible. This fact
unequivocally establishes that the imposter Taranjot Kaur who has
masqueraded as the present complainant at the instance of the petitioner
is an imposter. The complainant has supplied multiple documents during
the investigation to conclusively establish that she is Taranjot Kaur alias
Slony Taranjot Kaur daughter of Gurdip Kaur Sekhon and Hardial Singh
Sekhon. Further, a judgment in CWP No.10269 of 1997 titled as Taranjot
Kaur Vs. Adviser to the Administrator, U.T., Chandigarh and others has
been submitted by the complainant. A perusal of the judgment reflects
that the petition was filed by the complainant to set aside the resumption
JITESH LAL
2026.07.21 16:46
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM-M-26710-2026 -18-
order dated 14.12.1982, 03.10.1989 and 08.07.1992 pertaining to
residential House No.215 Sector 16-A, Chandigarh and the particulars of
the complainant specifically her DoB, name of father and mother
including date of the death of her father Hardial Singh Sekhon are in
consonance with the other documents submitted by the complainant. In
pursuance of the aforementioned judgment of this Court, possession of
the House No.215, Sector 16A, Chandigarh has been handed over to the
complainant Taranjot Kaur vide letter dated 28.04.2015 after verifying
her identity and perusal of all papers submitted by her before the Estate
Office, U.T., Chandigarh. He therefore contends that it stand established
beyond any doubt that the complainant along with her sister-in-law
Navdip Kaur and niece Eveleen Kaur are the heirs to the property
bearing House No.53 Sector 8A, Chandigarh and all the documents set
up by the petitioner in furtherance to the civil suit are forgeries.
Therefore, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is certainly
required to unearth the larger conspiracy and to establish the identity of
the Imposter Taranjot Kaur. Thus, the present petition is liable to be
dismissed.
6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
7. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumitha Pradeep
Vs. Arun Kumar C.K. & Anr. 2022 Live Law (SC) 870 held that merely
because custodial interrogation was not required by itself could not be a
ground to grant anticipatory bail. The first and the foremost thing the
Court hearing the anticipatory bail application is to consider is the prima
JITESH LAL
2026.07.21 16:46
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM-M-26710-2026 -19-
facie case against the accused. The relevant extract of the judgment is
reproduced hereinbelow:-
“It may be true, as pointed out by learned counsel
appearing for Respondent No.1, that charge-sheet has
already been filed. It will be unfair to presume on our part
that the Investigating Officer does not require Respondent
No.1 for custodial interrogation for the purpose of further
investigation.
Be that as it may, even assuming it a case where
Respondent No.1 is not required for custodial interrogation,
we are satisfied that the High Court ought not to have
granted discretionary relief of anticipatory bail.
We are dealing with a matter wherein the original
complainant (appellant herein) has come before this Court
praying that the anticipatory bail granted by the High Court
to the accused should be cancelled. To put it in other words,
the complainant says that the High Court wrongly exercised
its discretion while granting anticipatory bail to the accused
in a very serious crime like POCSO and, therefore, the order
passed by the High Court granting anticipatory bail to the
accused should be quashed and set aside. In many
anticipatory bail matters, we have noticed one common
argument being canvassed that no custodial interrogation
is required and, therefore, anticipatory bail may be
granted. There appears to be a serious misconception of
law that if no case for custodial interrogation is made out
by the prosecution, then that alone would be a good
ground to grant anticipatory bail. Custodial interrogation
can be one of the relevant aspects to be considered along
with other grounds while deciding an application seeking
anticipatory bail. There may be many cases in which the
custodial interrogation of the accused may not be
JITESH LAL
2026.07.21 16:46
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM-M-26710-2026 -20-required, but that does not mean that the prima facie case
against the accused should be ignored or overlooked and
he should be granted anticipatory bail. The first and
foremost thing that the court hearing an anticipatory bail
application should consider is the prima facie case put up
against the accused. Thereafter, the nature of the offence
should be looked into along with the severity of the
punishment. Custodial interrogation can be one of the
grounds to decline custodial interrogation. However, even
if custodial interrogation is not required or necessitated, by
itself, cannot be a ground to grant anticipatory bail.
8. The various documents submitted by the complainant during
the investigation, some of which form part of the record to establish her
parentage, date of birth, and the fact that she is also known as Taranjot
Kaur alias Slony Taranjot Kaur are enumerated hereinbelow:-
Sr.
Name of Document Date
No.
Affidavit of Saloni Taranjot Kaur, D/o Hardial Singh, DoB:
1. 03.06.2015
26.09.1973, R/o H. No. 2792, Phase-VII, Mohali.
Aadhaar Card of Taranjot Kaur, D/o Hardial Singh, DoB:
2. 26.09.1973, R/o H. No. 2792, Phase-VII, Sector 61, Mohali —
(SAS Nagar), bearing Aadhaar No. 4701 8857 4171.
PAN Card of Taranjot Kaur, D/o Hardial Singh, DoB:
3. 26.09.1973, Permanent Account Number (PAN): —
BJFPK1888M.
Driving Licence bearing No. PB-6520160238952 of
Taranjot Kaur, D/o Hardial Singh, DoB: 26.09.1973, R/o H.
4. No. 2792, Phase-VII, Sector 61, Mohali (SAS Nagar); 01.04.2024
Blood Group: B+ve; Date of Issue: 01.04.2024; Valid up to
25.09.2033.
Identity Card issued by the Department of Education,
Government of Punjab in the name of Taranjot Kaur, D/o
5. Hardial Singh, Deputy Manager, R/o H. No. 2792, Phase- 27.06.2019
VII, Sector 61, Mohali (SAS Nagar); Mobile No.
9316132654.
Voter Identity Card bearing No. DFZ1757426 of Taranjot
6. Kaur, D/o Hardial Singh, R/o H. No. 2792, Phase-VII, 15.01.2003
Sector 61, Mohali (SAS Nagar).
JITESH LAL
2026.07.21 16:46
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM-M-26710-2026 -21-
9. It is apparent that the agreement to sell dated 29.09.1998
(Annexure R-1) which is the basis of the civil suit for permanent
injunction is a forgery. It is stated to be signed by Gurdip Kaur Sekhon,
the owner and purported seller of the property. However, a bare perusal
of the signature of Gurdip Kaur Sekhon as visible on the agreement
(Annexure R-1) with her signature on the passport (Annexure R-6)
would make it apparent that the signatures have been fabricated. Further,
Varyam Kaur, the mother of Gurdip Kaur Sekhon is stated to have thumb
marked the agreement on 29.09.1998 though she is passed away on
08.12.1996. Thirdly, Taranjot Kaur is stated to have thumb marked the
agreement though she signs documents as she is highly educated. Her
signature existing on her passport clearly shows her to have signed as
Slony as Taranjot Kaur. All the purported receipts of payment allegedly
signed by the complainant and Varyam Kaur are fabricated because
Varyam Kaur had already passed away whereas the complainant was
abroad.
10. The contention of the petitioner that there is a gap of 04
years between the complainant clearing her matriculation examination in
March, 1988 and passing her Sr. Secondary Certificate Examination in
1992 thereby creating a dispute regarding her identity is baseless. In fact,
the complainant had dropped two years on account of the severe illness
of her grandmother Varyam Kaur who she was taking care off. In fact,
the complainant ultimately went to study in the USA where she was
educated at Standford University. At the instance of the present
JITESH LAL
2026.07.21 16:46
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM-M-26710-2026 -22-
petitioner, certain complaints were made against the present complainant
because of which she was constrained to approach this Court seeking
protection from harassment. During the course of the inquiry conducted
by Vigilance Bureau, Punjab, the identity of the complainant has been
clearly established as Taranjot Kaur who is currently working as
Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan as a Deputy Manager (HRMS ID 934).
Further, way back in the year 2015 the complainant had already
furnished an affidavit regarding her name being Taranjot Kaur alias
Slony Taranjot Kaur D/o Hardial and her date of birth 26.09.1973.
11. The relevant extract of the reply dated 30.06.2026 filed by
the respondent No.1-U.T., Chandigarh wherein the identity of Taranjot
Kaur/complainant has been categorically established is reproduced
hereinbelow:-
“5. That further it is necessary to submit here that the
complainant has supplied sufficient material and documents
before the investigating agency, which conclusively establish
that she is alive and there is absolutely no dispute regarding
her identity. During investigation, the documents i.e.
Aadhaar, PAN, Driving License, Govt. ID card, Voter card
and an affidavit dated 19.05.2025 have been taken on record
from the complainant to clear all doubts regarding her
identity. Further it is necessary to mention here that during
an enquiry in a complaint No.555 of 2024, the Vigilance
Bureau Punjab had verified all above mentioned documents
pertaining to the ID of the complainant and even submitted
an affidavit in CRM-M-3687-2025 filed by the complainant
Taranjot Kaur and categorically submitted that no evidence
of forgery or fraud was found in enquiry. Copy of the
JITESH LAL
2026.07.21 16:46
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM-M-26710-2026 -23-affidavit dated 19.05.2025 and copies of Aadhaar, PAN,
Driving License, Govt. ID card, Voter card are annexed
herewith as Annexure R-7 and Annexure R-8.
6. That besides the above mentioned evidence, a copy of
judgment dated 05.09.2014 passed by this Hon’ble Court in
CWP No.10269 of 1997, titled as Taranjot Kaur Vs. Advisor
to the Administrator, U.T. Chandigarh & others has also
been submitted by the complainant to the investigation
agency. Perusal of the judgment reflects that the petition was
filed by the complainant to set aside the resumption order
dated 14.12.1982, order in appeal dated 03.10.1989 passed
by the Chief Administrator and order dated 08.07.1992
passed by Advisor to the Administrator, U.T. Chandigarh in
Revision Petition pertaining to the residential H.No.215,
Sector 16-A, Chandigarh and particulars of the complainant
specifically her DOB, name of father and mother, including
the date of death of complainant’s father S.Hardial Singh
Sekhon are in consonance to the documents submitted by the
complainant mentioned in the preceding paras. It is also
necessary to mention here that in pursuance to the
abovementioned judgment of this Hon’ble Court, possession
of H.No.215, Sector 16-A, Chandigarh was handed over to
the complainant Taranjot Kaur vide letter No.10904, dated
28.04.2015 after verifying her identity proof and perusal of
all papers submitted by complainant Taranjot Kaur before
the Estate Officer, U.T. Chandigarh also reflect that
particulars proving her identity are in consonance to the
above mentioned documents i.e. Aadhaar, PAN, Driving
License, Govt. ID card, Voter card (Annexure R-8). Copies of
judgment dated 05.09.2014 and possession letter dated
28.04.2015 and the documents submitted by the complainant
Taranjot Kaur before the Estate Officer while taking
possession on 30.04.2015 are annexed herewith as Annexure
R-9 and Annexure R-10.
JITESH LAL
2026.07.21 16:46
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM-M-26710-2026 -24-
7. That keeping in view of the above mentioned submissions
qua the evidence to prove identity of the complainant, it is
apparently clear on the record that complainant Taranjot
Kaur is daughter of Hardial Singh Sekhon and the imposter
who was masquerading as Taranjot Kaur is a third person
set up by the petitioner to usurp prime property of the
complainant through forged documents.
8. That petitioner has tried to mislead this Hon’ble Court that
depicting the picture that the dispute is of the Civil in nature
and no offence is made out against him, however, the
material collected during investigation prima facie
establishes commission of serious criminal offences involving
forgery, fabrication of evidence, impersonation and criminal
conspiracy. Further, it is submitted that investigation in the
present case is still underway and several important aspects
are yet to be thoroughly investigated after arrest of the
accused, including recovery of all original documents, the
manner of procurement of the alleged death certificate of the
complainant, and investigation into the involvement of other
persons and impersonators in the conspiracy and
preparation of forged documents. Thus, custodial
interrogation of the petitioner is absolutely necessary for
proper investigation of the present case. Without custodial
interrogation, it would be extremely difficult for the
investigating agency to unearth the complete conspiracy,
identify all persons involved and recover the original
documents/material used in commission of the offences.
9. That the allegations against the petitioner are grave and
serious in nature and clearly indicate that a larger
conspiracy has been hatched by the petitioner in connivance
with other persons only with an intention to illegally usurp
the aforesaid prime property worth more than Rs.100
crores.”
JITESH LAL
2026.07.21 16:46
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM-M-26710-2026 -25-
12. As the offence is prima facie established and the
investigation is to be taken to its logical conclusion of ascertaining other
conspirators in the preparation of forged documents etc. the custodial
interrogation of the petitioner is certainly necessary.
13. In view of the aforementioned discussion, I find no merit in
the present petition. Therefore, the same stands dismissed.
14. However, the observations made hereinabove are only for
the purposes of deciding this bail petition and the Trial Court is free to
adjudicate upon the matter on the basis of the evidence led before it
uninfluenced by any such observations made herein.
(JASJIT SINGH BEDI)
JUDGE
21.07.2026
JITESH
Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No
Whether reportable:- Yes/No
JITESH LAL
2026.07.21 16:46
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
