Harmeet Singh And Another v. State Of Punjab And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-47537 of 2024 Date of decision: 27.01.2025 Harmeet Singh and another ....Petitioners V/s State of Punjab and another ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present:

Mr. Amandeep Singh Manaise, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Amit Rana, Sr. DAG, Punjab for respondent No.1-State.

Ms. Gaganbir Kaur Kahlon, Advocate for respondent No.2.

***** MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL) The petitioners are seeking the concession of anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita in case FIR No.91 dated 02.11.2023 under Section 420 IPC and Section 10 of the Emigration Act (Sections 465/468/471 of the IPC added lateron), registered at Police Station Qila Lal Singh, Police District Batala, District Gurdaspur. 2.

On 23.09.2024, while issuing notice of motion, the following submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners were recorded:- "Learned counsel for the petitioners inter alia contends that vide orders dated 08.12.2023 and 30.11.2023 respectively, the learned Trial Court had extended the concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioners, however, subsequently offence under Sections 465, 468, 471 of the IPC was added POONAM RATHORE 2025.01.29 16:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh

CRM-M-47537 of 2024 -2even though allegations of forgery had been levelled at the first instance. Strangely, the learned Trial Court declined the concession of anticipatory bail when the second application under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. was moved only on the ground that a letter from the Ministry of External Affairs had been received leading to the recording of a DDR dated 05.04.2024."

3.

Thereafter on 24.10.2024, this Court had granted the interim bail to the petitioners and asked them to join investigation and cooperate with the investigating agency.

4.

Learned State counsel, on instructions, does not dispute the factum of the petitioners having joined investigation and cooperated with the investigating agency. He, on further instructions, submits that the petitioners are not required for further investigation much less for their custodial interrogation.

5.

In view of the above, the petition is allowed and interim order dated 24.10.2024, is made absolute subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C./482(2) of BNSS, 2023.

(MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) January 27, 2025 JUDGE poonam Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No POONAM RATHORE 2025.01.29 16:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh