Balbir Singh v. State Of Punjab

2023:PHHC:061844

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.37042 of 2020 Date of decision: 1st May, 2023 Balbir Singh ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present:

Mr. B.K. Mehta, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Ramdeep Pratap Singh, Sr. DAG, Punjab for the respondent/State.

Ms. Prabhjot Kaur and Mr. Lovepreet S. Sidhu, Advocates for the complainant.

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL) The petitioner is seeking the concession of anticipatory bail in case bearing FIR No.42 dated 27.02.2020 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 506, 120-B IPC registered at Police Station Rama Mandi, District Jalandhar.

Vide order dated 16.03.2023, the petitioner had been granted concession of interim bail in the following terms:- "Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that a false and fabricated case has been planted upon the petitioner. It is essentially inter se dispute between co-accused Dilpreet Singh and his brother i.e. complainant for which a civil litigation also took place between the two of them and which had since attained finality. Learned counsel submits that as per the allegations levelled in the

2023:PHHC:061844 CRM-M No.37042 of 2020 FIR, co-accused Dilpreet Singh transferred land measuring 30 marlas 70 sq. ft. in the name of the petitioner, who after 2 years transferred the land in the name of sons of said Dilpreet Singh. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is ready to join investigation and willing to cooperate with the investigating agency."

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of the order dated 16.03.2023, the petitioner has joined investigation and cooperated with the investigating agency. Learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel representing the complainant, on instructions, does not dispute the factum of the petitioner having joined investigation and cooperated with the investigating agency. He on further instructions submits that the petitioner is not required for further investigation much less for his custodial interrogation.

In the circumstances, the petition is allowed and the interim order dated 16.03.2023 is made absolute subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. Needless to say, in case the petitioner misuses the concession of bail granted to him, the State would be at liberty to seek cancellation of the bail granted to him. (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) JUDGE May 1, 2023 rps Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No