Baljeet Kaur v. State Of Punjab
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH ****
Reserved on: 22.11.2023
Pronounced on: 29.11.2023 BALJEET KAUR . . . . Petitioner Vs.
State of Punjab . . . . Respondent **** CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA **** Present: - Mr. Bhrigu Dutt Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. M.S. Nagra, AAG, Punjab.
Mr. Ankur Bansal, Advocate, for the complainant. **** DEEPAK GUPTA, J.
By way of this petition filed under Section 439 CrPC, petitioner pray for her release on regular bail in case FIR No.119 dated 22.07.2023 registered at Police Station Shahkot District Jalandhar Rural, District Jalandhar, under Sections 406 and 420 IPC. 2.
FIR was lodged against petitioner and one Sita on the basis of a complaint dated 21.07.2023; and other complaint dated 13.09.2022 made by Lakha Singh for committing fraud to the tune of 8 lakh. As per the allegations, petitioner along with co-accused allured the complainant that by investing 5 lakh, return of 9 lakh shall be given within 6 months. On this allurement, complainant invested 8 lakh and the petitioner assured the return of 13 lakh within 6 months. However, amount of the complaint was not returned and thus, he was cheated to the tune of 8 lakh. Complainant also came to know that various other people had also been cheated in the same manner.
3.
Investigation was carried out. Petitioner was arrested. Investigation has been completed and challan has since been presented in the Court.
4.
Contention of ld. counsel is that petitioner has been falsely implicated; that complainant was having money dealings with Ramandeep Kaur and a compromise was arrived on 29.07.2022, but said Ramandeep Kaur was not associated in the enquiry to know the real truth; that petitioner has already joined the proceedings and fully cooperated in the investigation. It is further submitted that it is a monetary dispute of civil nature, which has been given colour of criminal dispute; that petitioner is in custody for the last more than 3 months, having no criminal antecedents and so, she be allowed bail.
5.
By pointing out towards the nature of crime and the modus operandi to commit the fraud, ld. State counsel prayed for dismissing the petition.
6.
Heard.
7.
As per custody certificate, petitioner is in custody since 10.08.2023 i.e., for the last more than 3 months and 15 days. She is a woman and has no criminal antecedents. Case is triable by Magistrate. Investigation is already complete. Trial may take time to conclude. 8.
Having regard to all the facts and circumstances as noted above, no purpose shall be served by keeping the petitioner detained. As such, without commenting anything further on merits of the case, present petition is allowed. Petitioner is admitted to regular bail on her furnishing
requisite bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/ Duty Magistrate concerned on usual terms and conditions. Pending application(s), if any, shall stands disposed of. (DEEPAK GUPTA) JUDGE 29.11.2023
1. Whether speaking/reasoned?
Yes
2. Whether reportable?
Yes/No