Vikas Singh v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH 101+213 2024:PHHC:031120 Date of decision: March 5th, 2024 Vikas Singh .....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab .....Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present:

Dr. Rau P.S. Girwar, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Amit Rana, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. K.S. Sidhu, Advocate for applicant/respondent No.2.

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL) CRM-751-2024 Prayer in this application is for impleading the complainant namely Kaur Singh as respondent No.2 to the instant petition. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed and the amended memo of parties appended along with the application is taken on record.

Registry is directed to place the same at the appropriate place of the case.

CRM-822-2024 Prayer in this application is for placing on record short reply and Annexures R-2/1 and R-2/2 and for exemption from filing the certified/typed copies of the same.

Application is allowed subject to just exceptions.

-2Short reply along with documents Annexures R-2/1 and R-2/2 is taken on record.

Exemption, as prayed for, is granted.

CRM-48759-2023 Prayer in this application is for amendment in the prayer clause.

Application is allowed subject to just exceptions. Registry is directed to place the amended pages i.e. Annexure A-1 at the appropriate place of the case. CRM-M-50171-2023 Petitioner is seeking the concession of anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in case FIR No.107 dated 07.09.2023 under Sections 406, 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered at Police Station Phool, District Bathinda.

2.

Vide order dated 05.10.2023, the petitioner had been granted interim anticipatory bail with direction to join investigation and the relevant part of the said order reads as under:- "Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that it is a case where the allegations against the petitioner were that he along with the immigration company had taken an amount of Rs.20 lacs to send the daughter of the complainant abroad on work visa. He referred to Annexure P-2 to state that the work visa was approved by the Canadian Embassy and thereafter, the complainant did not fulfill the obligation of submitting some documents and hence the daughter of the complainant could not go to abroad and it was thereafter, the present FIR got lodged. He also submitted that the

-3petitioner has clean antecedents and is not involved in any other case."

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of order dated 05.10.2023, the petitioner has joined investigation and cooperated with the investigating agency. 4.

Learned State counsel, 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.

5.

In view of the above, the petition is allowed and interim order dated 05.10.2023 is made absolute subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

March 5th , 2024 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Puneet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes Whether reportable :

No