Ramandeep Singh Alias Ramna v. State Of Punjab

2024:PHHC:016339 In The High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh CRM-M-5111-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision:- 06.02.2024 Ramandeep Singh @ Ramna ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL Present:- Mr. Chandan Singh Rana, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Ramdeep Partap Singh, Sr. DAG, Punjab, assisted by ASI Kuldeep.

***** FIR NO.

DATE POLICE STATION OFFENCES 18.7.2022 Dakha, District Ludhiana Rural 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC GURVINDER SINGH GILL , J . (Oral) 1.

The instant petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking grant of regular bail in respect of aforementioned FIR. 2.

The FIR was lodged at the instance of Jasandeep Singh wherein it is alleged that 5 persons had duped him of an amount of Rs.6 lacs on the pretext of getting him employment in Railway Department. Upon an enquiry having been conducted, while 3 persons were found to be innocent, the petitioner and Davinder Kumar were found to have committed the offences in question.

3.

Learned counsel submits that he has falsely been implicated in the present case and that there is no evidence to establish that the alleged MOHAN SINGH 2024.02.07 01:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment

CRM-M-5111-2024 (O&M) - 2 - 2024:PHHC:016339 amount of Rs.6 lacs had been paid by the complainant to the petitioner or to the co-accused and that the entire amount in question is stated to have been paid in cash and not by any bank transaction. 4.

Opposing the petition, learned State counsel submits that since there are specific and categoric allegations against the petitioner, his complicity is clearly evident. It has also been informed that the petitioner happens to be involved in one more case under Section 420 IPC. Learned State counsel also informed that the petitioner as on date has been behind bars since the last more than six months and that although charges have been framed but none out of the cited 7 PWs has been examined till date.

5.

This Court has considered the rival submissions. 6.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the custody period of the petitioner and that the trial has not even commenced till date inasmuch as none of the cited 7 PWs has been examined, further detention will not serve any useful purpose. The petition, as such, is accepted and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned.

06.02.2024 ( GURVINDER SINGH GILL) mohan JUDGE Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No MOHAN SINGH 2024.02.07 01:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment