High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/36735/2018allowed

Jagjit Singh And Another v. State Of Punjab

2019-05-01Mr. Justice Arvind Singh Sangwan2 pages

CRM-M No.36735 of 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.36735 of 2018 Decided on: 01.05.2019 Jagjit Singh and another ....Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN Present :

Ms. Priyanka Malik, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Joginder Pal Ratra, DAG, Punjab.

Mr. A.S. Manaise, Advocate for the complainant. ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, J. (Oral) Petitioner No.1 pray for grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No.214 dated 03.11.2017 registered under Sections 420/120-B IPC at Police Station Beas, District Amritsar Rural. Petition qua petitioner No.2 already dismissed as infructuous vide order dated 14.09.2018.

The operative part of the order dated 14.09.2018, vide which interim anticipatory bail has been granted to petitioner No.1, is reproduced as under:- "....Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that petitioner No. 1 Jagjit Singh is a partner in M/s Sonu Autos, a motorcycle dealer, and as per the allegations in the FIR, they had an agreement with M/s Lucky New Hope for the supply of bulk sale of the motorcycles at a discounted price. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations are primarily against the other co-accused who are running M/s Winning Edge Corporation as well as M/s Lucky New MOHD YAKUB 2019.05.01 16:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh

CRM-M No.36735 of 2018 Hope and have invited more than 1900 persons to invest their money in monthly lucky draw and schemes and thereafter, by closing the business, they have absconded. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that as per the agreement between petitioner No. 1 Jagjit Singh and the co-accused, who are running the aforesaid lucky draw schemes, the only allegations are that the petitioner was the dealer for supplying the motorcycles at a discounted price and even the petitioner is not found directly involved in the internal business of the coaccused. Learned State counsel submits that petitioner No.1 be directed to join investigation.

List again on 27.11.2018...."

Counsel for petitioner No.1 has submitted that, in pursuance to the order dated 14.09.2018, petitioner No.1 has appeared before the Investigating Officer and has joined the investigation. Counsel for the State has not disputed the aforesaid fact and submits that the petitioner is no more required for further investigation.

On the other hand, despite availing 02 opportunities, no affidavit has been filed by the complainant.

In view of the above, this petition is allowed and the interim bail granted to petitioner No.1 vide order dated 14.09.2018 is made absolute subject to the conditions envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

(ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN) JUDGE 01.05.2019 yakub Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No MOHD YAKUB 2019.05.01 16:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh