Hans Raj Singh v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-9441-2025 Date of decision: May 26th, 2025 Hans Raj Singh .....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab .....Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present:

Mr. Salil Dev Singh Bali, Advocate with Ms. Simmy, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Amit Rana, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL) Prayer in this petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.33 dated 09.12.2024 under Section 13(1)(b) read with Section 13(2) of The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 as amended by Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 2018, registered at Police Station Vigilance Bureau Range, Ferozepur. 2.

While issuing notice of motion on 19.02.2025, following submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner were recorded:- "Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the FIR was lodged more than 5 years after the initiation of an enquiry dated 18.07.2019 against him. The enquiry was initiated based on a complaint by unidentified person, covering the period from 01.01.2013 to 31.12.2019. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner fully cooperated with the enquiry, produced all relevant documents, and disclosed the sources of his payments and the properties which had been acquired by him. It has been further submitted that in the year PUNEET SACHDEVA 2025.05.26 14:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M-9441-2025 -22022, 04 other FIRs concerning a similar subject matter were registered against him, in which he has since been extended the concession of regular bail. It has still further been asserted that in compliance of all the bail orders, the petitioner has also submitted an affidavit disclosing all his properties.

Learned counsel has further contended that the present case is based on documentary evidence, and all relevant records are already in the custody of the Investigating Agency. Since the FIR has been lodged after an inordinate delay of 5 years from the initiation of the enquiry, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessitated. Hence, the petitioner would be entitled to the concession of anticipatory bail."

3.

Thereafter, vide order dated 05.03.2025, the petitioner had been granted interim anticipatory bail with direction to join investigation.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of order dated 05.03.2025, the petitioner has joined investigation and cooperated with the investigating agency. 5.

Learned State counsel, on instructions, does not dispute the factum of the petitioner having joined investigation and cooperated with the investigating agency. He, on further instructions, submits that the petitioner is not required for further investigation much less for his custodial interrogation.

6.

In view of the above, the petition is allowed and interim order dated 05.03.2025 is made absolute subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C./482(2) BNSS.

May 26th, 2025 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Puneet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No PUNEET SACHDEVA 2025.05.26 14:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh