Pardeep Singh v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM No.M-42154 of 2015 (O&M) Date of Decision: September 05, 2017 Pardeep Singh

...Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

Present:

Mr.Naveen Sharma, Advocate for Mr.Kamaljit Singh Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr.Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, Sr.DAG, Punjab for the respondent-State.

Mr.K.B.S.Mann, Advocate for the complainant.

**** INDERJIT SINGH, J.

Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.53 dated 12.09.2015 under Sections 420 and 34 IPC, registered at Police Station SGN Dev Thermal Plant, Bathinda, District Bathinda.

Notice of motion was issued. Learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for the complainant appeared and contested the petition. I have heard learned counsel for the parties as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that there is no Vineet Gulati 2017.09.06 15:26 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CRM No.M-42154 of 2015 -2receipt regarding payment nor there is any cogent evidence regarding the same. There is alleged audio recording of the conversation of the petitioner but that is not the voice of the petitioner.

From the record, I find that the petitioner was granted interim bail on 13.01.2016 by this Court and since then, the petitioner is on interim bail. The perusal of the FIR shows that allegation against the petitioner is that he took money by fraud on various pretexts but no specific particulars i.e. date, month etc. have been given.

The petitioner has already joined the investigation. He is not required for custodial interrogation. The trial of the case will take long time. No useful purpose will be served by sending the petitioner to custody. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and without discussing the facts of the case in minute details and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case, where the petitioner is entitled to benefit of grant of anticipatory bail. Therefore, the present petition is accepted and the order dated 13.01.2016 granting interim bail to the petitioner, is made absolute. September 05 , 2017 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No Vineet Gulati 2017.09.06 15:26 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh