Punjab and Haryana HC Rejects Anticipatory Bail for Accused in NRI Land Fraud Case
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has rejected the anticipatory bail pleas of two accused involved in an illegal land sale case, highlighting the systemic abuse and exploitation of NRIs' properties.
Nri Property FraudAnticipatory BailPunjab And Haryana High CourtReal Estate FraudSystemic AbuseReal EstateMay 27, 2025
Background
The case revolves around a property in Village Noorpur Bet-2, owned by an NRI. The buyer had made an appointment to register a sale deed for this property. However, at the time of registration, an impersonator appeared in place of the actual buyer, accompanied by his advocate. The impersonator presented a sale deed drafted by the advocate, which was then registered.
Upon becoming suspicious, the buyer’s advocate obtained the original sale deed and inquired with the Registration Clerk about the impersonation. It was discovered that the Sub-Registrar had certified the impersonator as the seller at endorsement 1 on the sale deed. At endorsement 2, the Sub-Registrar also certified a witness and one of the accused as witnesses, even though the first witness was not present and did not sign the sale deed or have his photograph affixed. Instead, the impersonator’s advocate and another accused signed and affixed their photographs on the sale deed.
The Registration Clerk did not verify the witnesses and proceeded to register the sale deed. The buyer or his representative did not raise any objections regarding the registration with changed witnesses. Subsequently, a report was received from the Tehsildar concerned, Vigilance Bureau, Mohali, which led to the filing of an FIR under various sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and the Registration Act, 1908.
Analysis
The Court noted that the property in question, measuring 14 kanals and worth several crores, was owned by an NRI. The sale deed was executed for Rs. 30.20 Lakhs, with cheques worth Rs. 30 Lakhs never presented for encashment. The Court found it strange that the Sub-Registrar allowed the presentation of cheques instead of demand drafts at the time of execution of the sale deed.
The appointment for registration was taken by the first witness on behalf of the buyer. However, this witness did not appear. Instead, the impersonator’s advocate appeared and identified the parties as marginal witnesses. One of the accused identified the impersonator as the seller and owner of the property. The Court also noted that the impersonator’s advocate, a co-accused, played a similar role.
Further, the CCTV footage from the Sub-Registrar's office showed that the accused were present during the registration of the sale deed. One of the co-accused disclosed how the money was distributed among the accused persons.
The Court stated that the facts and circumstances indicated that the accused and other co-accused were part of a larger conspiracy to usurp the properties of NRIs. The real owner was unaware of the fraud when the sale deed was executed in favor of the co-accused by way of impersonation. The Court emphasized that no sale consideration was exchanged, and custodial interrogation was necessary to establish the roles of the other co-accused, including revenue officials.
The Court highlighted that this case exemplifies a disturbing trend of exploitation of NRIs, particularly those who cannot visit India frequently or manage their properties. Such property owners are often defrauded through forged documents and misuse of Powers of Attorney, leading to the sale of their properties at undervalued rates. The scale of this deceit is symptomatic of systemic abuse, where absence is weaponized and legal safeguards are routinely undermined.
These offenses are rooted in a breach of trust and stand on a different pedestal than conventional criminal offenses. They not only impact the personal and financial security of the victims but also have cascading effects on public trust in the real estate ecosystem and the economic stability of the State. The gravity of such acts extends far beyond individual transactions, corroding institutional credibility and social conscience. Therefore, the Court held that it could not afford to treat such cases lightly when considering the grant of bail.
Given the active participation of the accused and the criminal antecedents of one of the accused, the Court found no grounds to grant anticipatory bail and rejected both applications.
Case Details
[Bagel Singh v. State of Punjab, CRM-M No. 23740 of 2025, decided on 19-05-2025]
Advocates
For the petitioner: Karan Bansal, Raghav Puggal, Karan Puggal, Atul Goyal
For the respondent: DAG of Punjab Sandeep Kumar, Rajiv Malhotra, and Manan Khetarpal
Frequently Asked Questions
What is anticipatory bail?
Anticipatory bail is a legal provision that allows a person to apply for bail before being arrested. It is granted by the court to protect the individual from being arrested in a case where an FIR has been filed or is likely to be filed.
Why did the Punjab and Haryana High Court reject the anticipatory bail pleas?
The Court rejected the anticipatory bail pleas because the facts and circumstances of the case indicated that the accused were part of a larger conspiracy to usurp the properties of Non-Resident Indians (NRIs). The Court found that the accused played active roles in the fraud and that custodial interrogation was necessary to establish the roles of other co-accused.
What are the potential consequences of real estate fraud involving NRIs?
Real estate fraud involving NRIs can have severe consequences, including financial loss, legal complications, and a loss of trust in the real estate ecosystem. It can also undermine the economic stability of the State and corrode institutional credibility.
What legal provisions were cited in the case?
The case cited various sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and the Registration Act, 1908. The specific sections include 318(4), 319(2), 336(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2), and 61(2) of the BNS, along with Section 81 read with Section 34(3) and 82 of the Registration Act, 1908.
How can NRIs protect their properties from such frauds?
NRIs can protect their properties by regularly monitoring their assets, using trusted legal and financial advisors, and ensuring that all documents are properly verified and authenticated. They should also be cautious about granting Powers of Attorney and should seek legal advice if they suspect any fraudulent activity.
Tags:
Related News Articles
Sattva Group Eyes Ambitious Growth in Housing Sales, Targets Rs 6,500 Crore This Fiscal
The Bengaluru-based realty firm plans to launch multiple projects to achieve 85% growth in sales of residential properties, with a significant presence in South India
The Devastating Impact of Whale Phishing on Businesses: A Rs 40 Lakh Scam
A city-based real estate company was swindled of Rs 40 lakh by cyber criminals posing as the company’s director, highlighting the growing threat of whale phishing attacks.
GST Council Meeting Tomorrow: Expectations and Key Issues to be Discussed
GST Council Meeting, GST Compensation Cess, GST on Insurance Premiums, Relief for Foreign Airlines, GST Cuts and Exemptions
Eknath Shinde’s Confidence: A Common Man's CM Aiming to Return to Power in Maharashtra
Shinde emphasizes his commitment to engaging directly with citizens and listening to their concerns, vowing to be a common man's Chief Minister.
Urjita Jagdish Master's INR 105 Crore Luxury Apartment in Worli: A Reflection of Mumbai's Real Estate Boom
Urjita Jagdish Master, a prominent stock market investor and director of Deep Financial Consultants, has recently acquired a luxury apartment for INR 105 crore in Worli, Mumbai. This high-profile transaction highlights the growing trend of high-value prop
Lodha Group Reaches Record-Qarterly Pre-Sales of Rs 4,510 Crore in Q3 FY25
Real estate giant Lodha Group has achieved its highest-ever quarterly pre-sales of Rs 4,510 crore in the third quarter of financial year 2025. Here's a detailed look at the company's performance and strategic moves.