Palwinder Singh v. State Of Punjab

::1::

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

(115) Date of decision: 11.03.2026 PALWINDER SINGH ...... Petitioner V/s STATE OF HARYANA

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI

Present:

Mr. APS Sidhu, Advocate with Mr. Ashish Kaushik, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Geeta Rani, AAG, Haryana.

***** JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. (Oral) The prayer in this petition under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 is for the grant of the regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No.16 dated 14.05.2025 (Annexure P-1) under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC registered at Police Station NRI Amritsar.

2.

As per the prosecution case, the petitioner was an employee of one Amarbir Singh, the brother-in-law of the complainant-Gurpreet Singh. A fictitious Gurpreet Singh was set up, who executed a power of attorney in favour of Palwinder Singh (petitioner). On the basis of the said power of attorney, Palwinder Singh sold the property to Navjot Singh, who further sold the property to Hardev Singh.

3.

The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is Amarbir Singh, the brother-in-law of the complainant-Gurpreet Singh, who is the

::2::

mastermind. The petitioner has been implicated at the instance of his employer, Amarbir Singh. As the petitioner is in custody since 13.06.2025 but none of the 09 prosecution witnesses has been examined so far, the Trial is not likely to be concluded anytime soon and therefore, he is entitled to the concession of bail.

4.

The learned State Counsel and the counsel for the complainant, on the other hand, contend that both Palwinder Singh and Amarbir Singh are accused in the present case. The allegations are prima facie established against them. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of bail. It is however conceded that the petitioner is in custody since 13.06.2025 and that none of the 09 prosecution witnesses has been examined so far.

5.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 6.

This Court in the case titled as Maninder Sharma Vs. State Tax Officer, State, Mobile Wing, Jalandhar, Punjab bearing CRM-M240332021(O&M) Decided on 31.08.2022 has held as under:- "Therefore, broadly speaking (subject to any statutory restrictions contained in Special Acts), in economic offences involving the IPC or Special Acts or cases triable by Magistrates once the investigation is complete, final report/complaint filed and the triple test is satisfied then denial of bail must be the exception rather than the rule. However, this would not prevent the Court from granting bail even prior to the completion of investigation if the facts so warrant." 7.

In the instant case, admittedly, the petitioner is in custody 13.06.2025 but none of the 09 prosecution witnesses has been examined so

::3::

far. Therefore, the Trial in the present case is not likely to be concluded anytime soon. There are no serious apprehensions expressed by the State that the petitioner would abscond from justice, tamper with the evidence or influence witnesses if granted the concession of bail. Therefore, in this situation, the further incarceration of the petitioner is not required. 8.

Thus, without commenting upon the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner, namely, Palwinder Singh is ordered to be released on bail to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

9.

The petitioner shall appear before the police station concerned on the first Monday of every month till the conclusion of the trial and inform in writing each time that he is not involved in any other crime other than the present case.

10.

The petitioner (or anyone on his behalf) shall prepare an FDR in the sum of Rs.50,000/- and deposit the same with the Trial Court. The same would be liable to be forfeited as per law in case of the absence of the petitioner from trial without sufficient cause. 11.

The present petition stands disposed of.

12.

The pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly.

11.03.2026 (JASJIT SINGH BEDI) Kusum JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No