Meenu v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: October 3rd, 2024 Meenu .....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab .....Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present:

Mr. Vipin Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioner.

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL) Petitioner is seeking the concession of anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) in case FIR No.129 dated 04.09.2024 under Section 420 of the IPC and Section 13A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, registered at Police Station Division No.1, District Jalandhar. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations levelled in the FIR that two cheques of `30,000/- each had been paid by the complainant were in fact not deposited in the account of the petitioner but had gone into the account of her cousin Sunny alias Sajan, who had taken her for a ride. It has been submitted that only an amount of `50,000/- had been deposited in the account of the petitioner and, therefore, it was evident that totally false and fabricated allegations have been levelled against the petitioner. It has been further submitted that in the circumstances, custodial interrogation of the petitioner would not be required since no recovery is to be effected from her. It has also been submitted that the petitioner is willing to hand over the entire

-2amount i.e. `1,10,000/- allegedly received by her and co-accused Sunny alias Sajan from the complainant.

3.

On a pointed query put to the learned counsel, it has not been disputed that the petitioner has earlier also been booked for an offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act and is presently on bail in the said case.

4.

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

5.

Before proceeding further, it would be apposite to reproduce the contents of the FIR, which are as under:- "With reference to complaint No. 4238-DCP dated 27.07.2023 To Hon'ble Police Commissioner Sahib, Jalandhar City. Subject:- Regarding committing of fraud to the tune of Rs. 1.10 Lacs on the pretext of getting employed in Govt. Service and preparing of 10+2 Certificate. Sir, it is submitted that I, Raman Bains S/o Gian Chand is a resident of village Kanganiwal, P.O Jalandhar Tehsil and District Jalandhar and hereby State as under: That, one Sunny @ Sajan R/o Verka Milk plant chowk, backside Gurudwara Sahib street Jalandhar having (M) 97793-88435, 98776-33991 who is a Bhangra Artist that told me that my Aunt's daughter in law Meenu having (M) 79869-73033 is working as Clerk in D.

C Office and she will get 10+2 Certificate prepared for me and for that I have paid a total Rs. 1.10 Lacs which (includes Rs. 30,000/- each through 2 separate cheques and Rs. 50000/- for getting employed in a govt. service. I paid the asking of Sunny @ Sajan he has assured me that she is having contacts in Govt and has done the work earlier also and has got many people employed in Govt Service.

-3responsibility that I should not worry and my work will be done on priority basis. But now, even after passing of 2 years, neither Sunny @ Sajan has got me employed in Govt. Service nor has returned my money. Even, on asking him again and again to return back the money, he is ignoring on one pretext or the other. I request the police authorities to return back my money so that justice be done to me. I have evidence and recording of all the money which has been paid which can be produced at the relevant time. So, it is prayed to kindly get my amount of Rs. 1,10,000/- returned back to me and necessary action be taken against them."

6.

Thus, in view of the specific allegations levelled in the FIR against the petitioner, she does not deserve the extraordinary concession of anticipatory bail.

7.

The instant petition, therefore, stands dismissed. 8.

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.

October 3rd, 2024 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Puneet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes Whether reportable :

No