Kusum Lata Alias Kusum Gupta v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-19817-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 15.05.2025 Kusum Lata @ Kusum Gupta ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR

Present:

Mr. Kulwant Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Sandeep Kumar, DAG, Punjab.

HARPREET SINGH BRAR J. (Oral) 1.

This petition has been filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, seeking anticipatory bail in case FIR No.92 dated 28.07.2024 under Sections 406, 420, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered at Police Station Dugri, District Ludhiana. 2.

On 09.04.2025, the following order was passed:- "XX XX XX XX Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the petitioner is a household lady and she has been falsely implicated in the present case. In fact, the petitioner has executed an agreement to sell with coaccused Mohd. Salman, who is a property dealer. There is no agreement to sell between the petitioner and the complainant and at the behest of co-accused, he deposited Rs.20.00 lakhs in the account of the petitioner. Further, coaccused has sold the property owned by the petitioner to someone else. The dispute between the parties is civil in

nature. It is further contended that co-accused of the petitioner, namely Anand Saroop @ Anand Swaroop, has already been granted the concession of anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 21.03.2025 passed in CRM-M10179-2025. Moreover, the maximum sentence provided for the offences, under which the FIR (supra) is registered, is punishable upto 07 years and no notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS [erstwhile Section 41-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.')] has been served upon the petitioner.

Notice of motion for 09.05.2025.

Keeping in view the ratio of law enunciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. CBI (2022) 10 SCC 51; Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra and others 2010 SCC OnLine SC 137; Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia etc. Vs. State of Punjab (1980) 2 SCC 565, Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273 and Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State of NCT Delhi 2020 (1) RCR (Criminal) 833, the petitioner is directed to appear before Investigating Officer within a period of two weeks from today and thereafter, as directed by the Investigating Officer. In the event of arrest, the petitioner will be admitted to interim anticipatory bail on furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Investigating/Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation/Arresting Officer and abide by the conditions as provided under Section 482(2) of BNSS (erstwhile Section 438(2) of Cr.P.C.). If the Arresting Officer does not permit the petitioner to join the investigation, she would appear before learned Illaqa Magistrate, who would then summon the Arresting

Officer and direct him to join the petitioner in the investigation, in terms of the order of this Court. Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion by this Court and learned trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits, strictly in accordance with law."

3.

Learned State counsel, on instructions from SI Jagtar Singh, at the very outset, informs the Court that the petitioner has joined the investigation and his custodial interrogation is not required. 4.

In view of the statement of learned State counsel, order dated 09.04.2025 is hereby made absolute. The petitioner shall abide by the terms and conditions envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS (erstwhile Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973). 5.

The petition stands disposed of.

(HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE 15.05.2025 yakub Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No