Jagjit Singh v. State Of Punjab

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-24703 of 2025 (O&M) Date of decision : 19.05.2025 Jagjit Singh ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab .. Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S. GREWAL Present:- Mr. Tejbir Sigh, Advocate with Mr. Jatinder Pal Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

*** H.S. Grewal, J. (Oral) 1.

This is a petition for regular bail filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) in case bearing FIR No.129 dated 17.12.2024 under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 316(2), 336(2), 338, 336(3), 340(2) BNS, 2023 registered at Police Station Hathur, District Ludhiana Rural, Punjab.

  The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner in collusion with property dealers namely Gurcharan Singh and Jasmeet Singh had accepted commission in a land transaction wherein one Nirmal Singh had impersonated himself to be Nirmal Singh s/o Sarban Singh had accepted a sum of Rs. 15 lakhs from the complainant.

3.

Notice of motion.

4.

Mr. Manveer Singh Toor, AAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State whereas Ms. Ramandeep Kaur, Advocate for Mr.

-2Monty Goyal, Advocate has put in appearance and has filed vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that they had no way to find out the antecedents of Nirmal Singh as they are property dealers. He further contends that the petitioner was arrested on 03.04.2025 and is in custody since then. He further contends that the petitioner has clean antecedents. 6.

Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the grant of concession of regular bail and states that though the investigation in the present case is complete, however, challan has yet not been filed. He further states that the accused namely Nirmal Singh has not been arrested as of date. 7.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the material placed on record.

8.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, and the fact that challan in the present case has not been presented, although investigation has been completed. Moreover, the petitioner is not involved in any other case and is in custody since 03.04.2025, no useful purpose would be served to further detain the petitioner in jail and since the conclusion of the trial is likely to take a long time and as such, further incarceration of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice. In the present case, I deem it a fit case to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner. 9.

Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is granted concession of regular bail in the present case, on his furnishing requisite bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/ Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned. The pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

-310.

It is however, made clear that in case during his bail, the petitioner indulges in any offence, the State shall be at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail of the petitioner.

19th May, 2025 (H.S. GREWAL) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether Reportable :

Yes/No