Sadhvi Yoganjali Chetanya Puri v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-34359-2024 (O&M) Date of decision: 17.03.2025 Sadhvi Yoganjali Chetanya Puri ....Petitioner

Versus

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

Present:

Mr. P.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate with Ms. Bhavi Kapur, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Sandeep Kumar, DAG, Punjab.

Mr. Keshav Pratap Singh, Advocate for the complainant.

HARPREET SINGH BRAR J. (Oral) 1.

This petition has been filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, seeking anticipatory bail in case FIR No.62, dated 1.7.2024 registered under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code at Police Station Dehlon, District Police Commissionerate Ludhiana.

2.

On 19.07.2024, the following order was passed:- "XX XX XX XX The allegations, in nutshell, are that the petitioner, who had earlier been President of 'Dera Harisar Sri Sri 108 Jagad Guru Dev Puri Ji Maharaj Trust, Villate Qila, Raipur' forged 83 resolutions in the resolution register. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is 'Mohatmim' of the aforesaid dera and has

been acting as such since the year 2014. It has been submitted that the 'Mohatmim' acts as a President and that the petitioner had been continuing as such. Learned counsel submits that since the complainants, who claim themselves to be the trustees of aforesaid 'dera', have been trying to usurp the property of the Samadh and had been interfering into the peaceful possession, the petitioner was constrained to file a civil suit before the Trial Court, wherein an interim injunction was granted in favour of the petitioner on 7.3.2024. It has been submitted that although the complainants challenged the said order by way of filing an application for vacation of stay, but the same was declined vide order dated 24.4.2024. It has been submitted that thereafter the complainants filed an appeal before learned Additional District Judge, Ludhiana but the same has also been dismissed vide order dated 6.7.2024 (Annexure P-5).

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that subsequently Sub Divisional Magistrate, Ludhiana East initiated proceedings under Section 144 Cr.P.C. It has been submitted that learned Sub Divisional Magistrate, while passing order in terms of provisions of Section 144 Cr.P.C., infact exceeded its jurisdiction and directed holding of election within 48 hours and the petitioner being aggrieved by the said order approached this Court by way of filing criminal petition i.e. CRM-M-14481-2024 on 18.3.2024 and that the complainant as a counterblast thereafter lodged the present FIR. It has further been submitted that the impugned order passed by Sub Divisional Magistrate, Ludhiana East has been stayed by this Court vide order dated 20.3.2024 passed in CRM-M-14481-2024 (Annexure P-7).

Notice of motion for 11.11.2024 At this stage, Mr. Keshav Pratap Singh, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of one of the complainant and has filed Vakalatnama, which is taken on record. Learned counsel for the complainant submitted that the complainants are infact duly elected trustees pursuant to an election conducted on 17.1.2024, wherein the President was also elected, and which would consequently mean that the petitioner is no longer 'Mohatmim' or President of the 'dera' in question. It has further been submitted that the petitioner had been removed as President vide resolution dated 25.11.2023.

Having regard to the nature of allegations, which mainly pertain to forgery in the resolutions register, which is already stated to be in possession of the police and while also bearing in mind that the petitioner is a lady, it is directed that the petitioner, in the event of her arrest, be released on interim bail subject to her furnishing personal bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. However, the petitioner shall join the investigation as and when called upon to do so and cooperate with the Investigating Officer and shall also abide by the conditions as provided under Section 438

(2) Cr.P.C."

3.

Learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel for the complainant and on instructions from ASI Bhupinder Singh, at the very outset, informs the Court that the petitioner has joined the investigation and her custodial interrogation is not required. 4.

In view of the statement of learned State counsel, order dated 19.07.2024 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.

6.

It is made clear that in case the petitioner is required for further investigation, she may be called or joined the investigation on giving advance notice under Section 160 of Cr.P.C. (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE 17.03.2025 yakub Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No