Baljinder Singh v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH (Through video conferencing) Date of Decision: 29.09.2021 Baljinder Singh ......Petitioner Vs State of Punjab .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJ MOHAN SINGH Present:Mr. B.S. Sidhu, Sr. Advocate with Mr. S.S. Badal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. C.L. Pawar, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

**** RAJ MOHAN SINGH, J.(Oral) Petitioner seeks grant of regular bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C in case bearing FIR No.94 dated 12.05.2018 registered under Sections 406, 420 IPC and Section 24 of the Immigration Act at Police Station Mattaur, District SAS Nagar, Mohali. The FIR was registered at the instance of complainant

Barjinder Singh with the allegations that he wanted to go Canada on work permit. For that purpose, he met the petitioner. An agreement was executed. The complainant deposited an amount of Rs.3,20,540/- on 04.03.2017. In addition, he also paid an amount of Rs.9300/- as embassy fee. In total, he paid an amount of Rs.3,29,540/- to the petitioner, but he did not receive any visa and his work permit did not mature. Petitioner did not refund the money.

Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody since 20.02.2019 (though his custody has been shown w.e.f. 23.03.2019). The offence is triable by the Magistrate. Challan has already been presented, but charges have not been framed so far. The trial of the case in any case would take sufficient time to conclude.

Learned State counsel, however, opposed the bail on the ground that the petitioner is involved in 68 cases of similar nature.

With reference to the plea of learned State counsel, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that he has been involved in 68 cases. Out of those cases, he has been granted bail by different Courts including the High Court in 62 cases. In one case, he has been acquitted. One case has gone untraced in which report has been filed. Besides, the present

 case, one more case is fixed for 30.09.2021 and one case is yet to be filed by the petitioner in the High Court. Details of some of the cases are tabulated as under:-




      



 


  ! !"#$"!%&%# "'

#(&%%&#) *&'+*%&+ #%&!, 
+    +   %)&#%&%# ! !*%%*!%&%# #** &'&$%&#) *&'+*%&


+   +   %-&%%&%# ! !#'&##!%&%# #-& #(&$%&#) *&'+*%&


%* 

..   / +   +   %&&*%&%# ! !%&)'$!%&%# %% &(&%%&#) *&'+*%&+ #%&!, 
+    +   %)&-%&%# ! !%&&*&!%&%# %""

&##%%&#) *&'+*%&


%* 

..   / +   +   %-&-%&%# ! !%&&-%!%&%# #) &$&%%&#( *%& 
 %*

..   / +   +   #'&'%&%#

 ! !%'$-&!%&%# "* #'&%%&#) *&'+*%&


+   +   #(&$%&%# ! !*%#(!%&%# "% #"&%%&#) *&'+*%&+ #%&!, 
+    +   %"&(%&%# ! !%#"$%!%&%# #) &)&%%&#) *&'+*%&+ #%&!, 
+    +   &-&)%&%# ! !*(&$!%&%# %# &(&%%&#) *&'+*%&


+   +   &)&(%&%# ! !%())'!%&%# #$ &$&%%&#) *&'+*%&+ #%&!, 
+    +   #-&(%&%# In all the aforesaid cases, petitioner has been granted regular bail by the High Court after considering the period of custody and other attending circumstances. The factum of total number of cases has also been noticed in some of the cases. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts, stage of the trial and in view of long custody of the petitioner, I deem it appropriate to grant regular bail to the petitioner without meaning anything on merits of the case.

In view of above, petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to his furnishing adequate bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial

 Court/concerned Duty Magistrate.

Nothing expressed hereinabove would be construed to be an expression of opinion on merits of the case. (RAJ MOHAN SINGH) September 29, 2021 JUDGE Prince Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No