Geeta Verma v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH 2023:PHHC:142880 CRM-M-50315-2023 Date of decision: November 8th, 2023 Geeta Verma .....Petitioner

Versus

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

Present:

Mr. Sukhcharan S. Gill, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Kanica Sachdeva, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab. MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL) Petitioner is seeking the concession of bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in case FIR No.159 dated 08.06.2023 under Sections 406, 420, 465, 466, 467, 468, 471, 474, 120B of the IPC registered at Police Zirakpur. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case for allegedly preparing forged documents after using forged stamps of other finance companies, and subsequently duping people in the name of processing fees for their loans. While drawing the attention of this Court to the FIR in question, which has been annexed as Annexure P-1, learned counsel has submitted that the petitioner was not even named in the FIR in question. It has been submitted that the petitioner came to be nominated on the basis of a disclosure statement suffered by co-accused Amit Kumar, who stated that he, in connivance with the petitioner, had formed four companies in which the petitioner is having 50% of share but the accounts of these companies were managed by him and other PUNEET SACHDEVA 2023.11.08 18:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document.

Chandigarh

CRM-M-50315 -2023 -2co-accused. It has been submitted that in the facts and circumstances, since the challan stands presented and the petitioner has been in custody since 06.07.2023, her further incarceration would serve no useful purpose.

3.

Per contra, learned State counsel while opposing the prayer and submissions made by the counsel opposite, has not been able to controvert that investigation in hand is complete and the challan stands presented. It has also not been disputed by the learned State counsel that the petitioner is not involved in any other criminal case, much less a case of similar nature.

4.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant material on record.

5.

The petitioner has been in custody since 06.07.2023. The trial is going to take considerable time to conclude as only challan stands presented and charges are likely to be framed on the next date of hearing. The petitioner is not stated to be involved in any other case much less in a case of similar nature.

6.

In the facts and circumstances as enumerated hereinabove, this Court deems it fit to extend the concession of bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed. Petitioner be admitted to bail to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. However, it is made clear that anything observed hereinabove shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. November 8th, 2023 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Puneet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes Whether reportable :

No PUNEET SACHDEVA 2023.11.08 18:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document.

Chandigarh