Bail granted in land dispute as allegations of forgery lack scientific evidence and investigation is complete.

The applicant, Dinesh Padiyar, was arrested on 25.12.2025 in connection with FIR No. 0102 of 2025 at Raiwala Police Station

The informant, Pratap Singh, alleged he paid Rs. 38,25,000/- for land plots, but the applicant failed to execute the sale deeds

Initially registered under Section 420 IPC, the investigation subsequently added charges of impersonation, forgery, and conspiracy

The applicant contended the dispute was civil/commercial in nature, payments were made via banking channels, and no forensic evidence supported the forgery allegations

The State opposed the bail, citing the risk of influencing witnesses and the gravity of the alleged impersonation of land allottees

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to enlargement on bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, considering the nature of the dispute and the status of the investigation

2. Whether the continued pre-trial incarceration of the applicant is justified when the investigation is complete and the evidence is primarily documentary

Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, governing the grant of bail

fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that bail is the rule and jail is the exception, emphasizing that a detailed appreciation of evidence is not required at the bail stage and that pre-trial detention should not serve as punishment

parity between the nature of the allegations (Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, and 120-B of the IPC) and the necessity of custodial interrogation

The Court observed that the dispute primarily stems from a commercial land transaction and is largely substantiated by documentary evidence already in the possession of the investigating agency

The Court noted that although serious charges like forgery (Sec. 467/468 IPC) were added, the State failed to produce conclusive forensic or expert opinions, such as handwriting analysis, to link the applicant to the alleged forgeries at this stage

Since the investigation is complete and the charge sheet has been filed, the Court reasoned that no further custodial interrogation was required

Furthermore, the Court found no evidence of criminal antecedents or a flight risk, concluding that the ingredients of the alleged offences are matters for trial and do not warrant further incarceration given the applicant’s time already served since December 2025

The application was allowed, and the Court directed that Dinesh Padiyar be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties to the satisfaction of the trial court subject to the condition that the applicant shall not misuse his liberty or interfere with the trial