← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/19540/2025allowed

Gagangian Deep Singh (Mand) v. State Of Punjab

2025-08-07Mr. Justice Sanjay Vashisth3 pages

- 1 -

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Decided on : 07.08.2025 Gagangian Deep Singh (Mand) . . . Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Punjab . . . Respondent(s)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT: Mr. PPS Dhull, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Mr. Manjinder S. Bhullar, DAG, Punjab.

Mr. Vishwajit Bedi, Advocate, for the complainant. **** SANJAY VASHISTH , J. (Oral) 1.

Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438 Cr.P.C.), is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed here-under:- Name of Petitioner (s) FIR No.

Date Section(s) Police Station District Gagangian Deep Singh (Mand) 06.03.2024 406, 420, 120-B of IPC, NRI Police Commissioner Ludhiana and Section 82 of the Registration Act, 1908 2.

On 08.04.2025, following order was passed:- "1.

Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438 Cr.P.C.), is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:- Name & age of Petitioner (s) FIR No.

Date Section(s) Police Station District Gagangian Deep Singh (Mand), aged about 42 years.

06.03.2024 406, 420, 120-B of IPC, and Section 82 of the Registration Act, 1908 NRI Police Commis sioner Ludhiana 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that as per the allegations, main beneficiary is Kamaljeet Kaur (Mand), who is related as wife of the petitioner. She has already been granted concession of interim anticipatory bail by this Court, vide order dated 27.03.2025 passed in CRM-M16993-2025. Said petition is now fixed for 22.05.2025. Further submits that there is no direct involvement of the petitioner in the present case. Although as per the allegations, he had knowledge

- 2 - of the pendency of civil suit in which the power of attorney was already in question, on the basis of which the sale deed was executed. 3.

Therefore, counsel for the petitioner submits that allegations are to be proved by the prosecution, primarily on the basis of documentary evidence and for that, custodial interrogation would not serve any useful purpose for the prosecution. However, petitioner is ready to join the investigation, if protected from arrest by this Court.

Thus, prays for grant of concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the present case.

4.

Notice of motion.

5.

On advance notice, Mr. Amandeep Singh, DAG, Punjab, puts in appearance on behalf of the respondent - State, and seeks some time to file status report.

6.

Adjourned to 22.05.2025.

To be heard along with CRM-M-16993-2025.

7.

In the meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to join the investigation as and when required to do so by the Investigating Agency. In the event of his arrest, the petitioner shall be released on ad-interim bail, subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall also be abide by all the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.). 8.

Besides, it is directed that petitioner would hand over his passport to the Investigating Agency or to Court concerned, if he possesses. Otherwise, would submit an affidavit, disclosing the fact that he does not possess any passport.

It is also directed that before leaving country any time during trial, petitioner would seek prior permission of the Court." 3.

Continuing his submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that in compliance of the order dated 08.04.2025, passed by this Court, petitioner has joined the investigation, and has fully co-operated. Therefore, he prays for confirmation of the said interim anticipatory bail order.

4.

Learned State counsel on instructions, confirms the said averment made by learned counsel for the petitioner of joining the investigation on 03.06.2025, by the petitioner, and submits that as of now, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of investigation.

5.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

6.

Since, petitioner has already joined the investigation and custodial interrogation is no more required; ad-interim bail order dated 08.04.2025, passed by this Court is hereby made absolute. Accordingly,

- 3 - present petition is allowed.

However, petitioner shall continue to join the investigation as and when required to do so and abide by all the terms and conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023.

7.

Accordingly, petition stands disposed of.

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE August 07, 2025 J.Ram Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No