Sehajpreet Singh v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-50870-2024 Date of decision: January 21st, 2025 Sehajpreet Singh .....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab .....Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present:

Mr. Sunny K. Singla, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Amit Rana, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. 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.112 dated 13.08.2024 under Sections 420, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered at Police Station City-I, Malerkotla.

2.

Vide order dated 15.10.2024, 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, inter alia, contends that the petitioner was working as an employee with English Guru Finance, Malerkotla, and had no role to play in extending any assurance to the complainant to settle her abroad. It has been further submitted that even as per the allegations levelled in the FIR, which has been annexed as Annexure P-1, there is no allegation that any amount of money was handed over to the petitioner either in cash or through any banking instrument. Furthermore, the allegation, PUNEET SACHDEVA 2025.01.21 14:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M-50870-2024 -2if any, is of only a demand of 40,000/- having been made by ₹ the petitioner towards biometric fee, whereas the fee was just 18,500/-.

₹ "

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of order dated 15.10.2024, 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 15.10.2024, is made absolute subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C./482(2) BNSS.

January 21st, 2025 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Puneet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes Whether reportable :

No PUNEET SACHDEVA 2025.01.21 14:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh