Raj Kumar v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-6800-2025 Date of decision: February 15th, 2025 Raj Kumar .....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab .....Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present:

Mr. Mansur Ali, Advocate with Mr. Naresh Jain, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Navdeep Singh, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. MANJARI NEHRU KAUL , J. (ORAL) Petitioner is seeking the concession of bail in FIR No.2 dated 07.01.2025 under Section 7A of The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, registered at Police Station Vigilance Bureau, Bathinda. 2.

Learned State counsel has, on instructions, submitted that there was an audio recording, wherein the petitioner could be heard demanding 11,000/- as bribe on behalf of the Tehsildar ₹ for getting the sale deed registered.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has, however, submitted that it is a matter of record that the sale deed already stood registered and hence, there was no occasion for the petitioner to have raised any demand for bribe; furthermore, as per the case of the prosecution the alleged demand had been made on behalf of Tehsildar, who is not even made an accused in the present case.

PUNEET SACHDEVA 2025.02.15 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M-6800-2025 -24.

Learned State counsel, on further instructions, submits that the matter is still pending investigation and the voice sample of the petitioner is required to be taken and hence, he be not extended the concession of bail at this stage.

5.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner undertakes that the petitioner would give his voice sample as and when asked for by the investigating agency.

6.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material placed on record.

7.

The petitioner has been in custody since 07.01.2025. 8.

In the facts and circumstances as enumerated hereinabove, more so when the trial would take considerable time to conclude, this Court deems it fit to extend the concession of bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner be admitted to bail to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. 9.

Needless to add, the petitioner shall abide by the undertaking given in this Court today regarding giving his voice sample to the investigating agency. Furthermore, in case the petitioner fails to abide by the undertaking given, the State would be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail of the petitioner.

10.

However, it is made clear that anything observed hereinabove shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

February 15th, 2025 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Puneet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No PUNEET SACHDEVA 2025.02.15 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh