Avtar Singh v. State Of Punjab

CRM-M-28152-2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-28152 -2024 Decided on: 19.07.2024 Avtar Singh

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

Present:

Mr. Vipul joshi, Advocate and Mr. Piyush Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Anurag Chopra, Addl. AG, Punjab.

**** ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

FIR No.

Dated Police Station Sections 08.03.2024 Vigilance Bureau, Flying Squad1, Punjab at Mohali, District SAS Nagar (Mohali), Punjab 13(1)(a) r/w 13(2) of PC Act 1988 and Sections 409, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 & 120B IPC 1.

The petitioner, incarcerated upon his arrest in the FIR captioned above, had come up before this Court under Section 439 CrPC seeking regular bail. 2.

On 14.06.2024, Coordinate Bench of this Court had granted interim bail to the petitioner, which is continuing till date. Thereafter on 16.07.2024, petitioner requested to extend the interim order and voluntarily made statement that he is ready to declare his assets. On this ground, interim was extended and petitioner was given time to declare his assets as well his spouse by way of affidavit. 3.

Petitioner's counsel submits that they had handed over the affidavits to the Investigator and voluntarily complied with the order of declaring assets and it is submitted that they would not claim such declaration as self incrimination, violation of Article 20/21 of Constitution of India, Bharatiya Sakshaya Adhiniyam 2023 or any other law in force. The investigator may verify such assets if required and proceed in accordance with law, if any anomalies found. The concerned investigator is further directed to forward one original copy of the affidavit to the petitioner's employer within two weeks from today. He further submits that further pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreparable injustice to the petitioner and family. ANJU RANI 2024.07.24 17:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh

CRM-M-28152-2024 4.

The State's counsel does not dispute the contention made by counsel for the petitioner, however opposes the bail.

5.

I have gone through the record and heard counsel for the parties at length. 6.

Given the facts and circumstances peculiar to the case coupled with the fact that petitioner had voluntarily declared assets and considering the amount involved, nature of allegations, there would be no justification for pre-trial incarceration. Petition is allowed. Interim order dated 14.06.2024, is made absolute, subject to the condition that petitioner shall join investigation as and when called upon do so. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 19.07.2024 anju rani Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes Whether reportable:

No.

ANJU RANI 2024.07.24 17:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh