DINESH KUMAR AND ANR v. STATE OF PUNJAB
Case Details
CRM-M-5929-2025 -1- 202 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-5929-2025 Date of decision: 26.03.2025 DINESH KUMAR AND ANR. ...PETITIONERS VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB ...RESPONDENT CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present: Mr. Sant Pal Singh Sidhu, Advocate for the pe(cid:26)(cid:26)oners.
Legal Reasoning
Prima facie evidence has come on record that the pe(cid:26)(cid:26)oners had commi<ed fraud to the tune of Rs.70 lakhs with the complainant." REASONING: 7. Pe(cid:26)(cid:26)oner voluntary hand over demand draA of Rs.10 lacs to complainant to Renu Bala 2025.03.28 11:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document prove his bonafide. Pre-trial incarcera(cid:26)on should not be a replica of post-convic(cid:26)on CRM-M-5929-2025 -3- sentencing. The evidence might be prima facie sufficient to launch prosecu(cid:26)on or to frame charges, but this Court is not considering the evidence at that stage but is analyzing it for the stage of an(cid:26)cipatory bail. An analysis of the above does not jus(cid:26)fy custodial interroga(cid:26)on or pre-trial incarcera(cid:26)on. 8. Given the above, the penal provisions invoked coupled with the primafacie analysis of the nature of allega(cid:26)ons and the other factors peculiar to this case, there would be no jus(cid:26)fiability for custodial interroga(cid:26)on or the pre-trial incarcera(cid:26)on at this stage. Without commen(cid:26)ng on the case's merits, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and for the reasons men(cid:26)oned above, the pe(cid:26)(cid:26)oners makes a case for bail. 9. Given above, provided the pe(cid:26)(cid:26)oners are not required in any other case, the pe(cid:26)(cid:26)oners shall be released on an(cid:26)cipatory bail in the FIR cap(cid:26)oned above subject to furnishing bonds to the sa(cid:26)sfac(cid:26)on of the Arres(cid:26)ng Officer, and if the ma<er is before a Court, then the concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before accep(cid:26)ng the surety, the concerned Officer/Court must be sa(cid:26)sfied that if the accused fails to appear, such surety can produce the accused. Given the conduct of the pe(cid:26)(cid:26)oners in voluntary handing over a demand draA of Rs.10 lacs. 10. While furnishing a personal bond, the pe(cid:26)(cid:26)oners shall men(cid:26)on the following personal iden(cid:26)fica(cid:26)on details: 1. AADHAR number 2. Passport number (If available) and when the a<es(cid:26)ng officer/court considers it appropriate or considers the accused a flight risk. 3. Mobile number (If available) 4. E-Mail id (If available) 11. 12. This order is subject to the pe(cid:26)(cid:26)oners complying with the following terms. The pe(cid:9)(cid:9)oners are directed to join the inves(cid:9)ga(cid:9)on within seven days of uploading this order on the official webpage of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana and as and when called by the Inves(cid:9)gator. The pe(cid:26)(cid:26)oners shall be in deemed custody for Sec(cid:26)on 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872/ Sec(cid:26)on 23 of BSA, 2023. The pe(cid:26)(cid:26)oners shall join the inves(cid:26)ga(cid:26)on as and when called by the Inves(cid:26)ga(cid:26)ng Officer or any Superior Officer and shall cooperate with the inves(cid:26)ga(cid:26)on at all further stages as required. In the event of failure to do so, the prosecu(cid:26)on will be open to seeking cancella(cid:26)on of the bail. During the inves(cid:26)ga(cid:26)on, the pe(cid:26)(cid:26)oners shall not be subjected to third-degree, indecent language, inhuman treatment, etc. 13. The pe(cid:26)(cid:26)oners shall abide by all statutory bond condi(cid:26)ons and appear before Renu Bala 2025.03.28 11:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document the concerned Court(s) on all dates. The pe(cid:26)(cid:26)oners shall not tamper with the evidence, CRM-M-5929-2025 -4- influence, browbeat, pressurize, induce, threaten, or promise, directly or indirectly, any witnesses, Police officials, or any other person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case or dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Police or the Court. 14. In case the Inves(cid:26)gator/Officer-In-Charge of the concerned Police Sta(cid:26)on arraigns another sec(cid:26)on of any penal offense in this FIR, and if the new sec(cid:26)on prescribes a maximum sentence that is not greater than the sec(cid:26)ons men(cid:26)oned above, then this bail order shall be deemed to have also been passed for the newly added sec(cid:26)on(s). However, suppose the newly inserted sec(cid:26)ons prescribe a sentence exceeding the maximum sentence prescribed in the sec(cid:26)ons men(cid:26)oned above; then, in that case, the Inves(cid:26)gator/Officer-In- Charge shall give the pe(cid:26)(cid:26)oners no(cid:26)ce of a minimum of seven days, providing an opportunity to avail the remedies available in law. 15. This bail is condi(cid:26)onal, and the founda(cid:26)onal condi(cid:26)on is that if the pe(cid:26)(cid:26)oners indulges in any non-bailable offense, the State may file an applica(cid:26)on for cancella(cid:26)on of this bail before the Sessions Court, which shall be at liberty to cancel this bail. 16. Any observa(cid:26)on made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments. 17. It is clarified that payment of Rs.10 lacs shall not be construed as admission or otherwise against the pe(cid:26)(cid:26)oner at any stage. 18. A cer(cid:26)fied copy of this order would not be needed for furnishing bonds, and any Advocate for the Pe(cid:26)(cid:26)oners can download this order along with case status from the official web page of this Court and a<est it to be a true copy. If the a<es(cid:26)ng officer wants to verify its authen(cid:26)city, such an officer can also verify its authen(cid:26)city and may download and use the downloaded copy for a<es(cid:26)ng bonds. 19. Pe(cid:26)(cid:26)on allowed in terms men(cid:26)oned above. All pending applica(cid:26)ons, if any,
Arguments
Mr. Sukhdev Singh, AAG, Punjab. Mr. P.S. Hundal, Advocate for the complainant. **** ANOOP CHITKARA, J. (ORAL) Pe00on for An0cipatory Bail under Sec0on 482 BNSS FIR No. Dated Police Sta(cid:26)on Sec(cid:26)ons 06 09.01.2025 City Balachaur, District Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar 406 and 420 of IPC, 1860 1. The pe(cid:26)(cid:26)oners apprehending arrest in the FIR cap(cid:26)oned above has come up before this Court under Sec(cid:26)on 482 of Bhara(cid:26)ya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], seeking an(cid:26)cipatory bail. 2. In paragraph 17 of the bail pe(cid:26)(cid:26)on, pe(cid:26)(cid:26)oner No.1 have clean antecedents, however pe(cid:26)(cid:26)oner No.2 has the following criminal history:- (cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:3) (cid:7)(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:3)(cid:4) (cid:10)(cid:11)(cid:12)(cid:13)(cid:14)(cid:15)(cid:13)(cid:11)(cid:2) (cid:16)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:13)(cid:18)(cid:19)(cid:13)(cid:19) (cid:20)(cid:6)(cid:21)(cid:22)(cid:23)(cid:13)(cid:4)(cid:1)(cid:12)(cid:11)(cid:12)(cid:22)(cid:6)(cid:18) (cid:24)(cid:3) (cid:24)(cid:25)(cid:26) (cid:24)(cid:27)(cid:3)(cid:24)(cid:28)(cid:3)(cid:28)(cid:29)(cid:24)(cid:30) (cid:31)(cid:28)(cid:31)(cid:4)(cid:11)(cid:18) (cid:4)(cid:31)(cid:28)!(cid:4)(cid:6)(cid:17)(cid:4)(cid:8)(cid:20)" "(cid:22)(cid:12)#(cid:4)$(cid:11)(cid:21)(cid:11)(cid:23)%(cid:11)&(cid:2)’(cid:4) (cid:10)(cid:22)(cid:19)(cid:12)(cid:2)(cid:22)(cid:23)(cid:12)(cid:4)(cid:1)%(cid:11)%(cid:13)(cid:13) (cid:4) $%(cid:11)((cid:11)(cid:12)(cid:4)(cid:1)(cid:22)(cid:18)(%(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:11)((cid:11)(cid:2) 3. The facts and allega(cid:26)ons are being taken from the short reply filed by the State, which reads as follows: "That in compliance to the order dated 31.01.2025 passed by this Hon'ble Court, it is respec;ully submi<ed that the inves(cid:26)ga(cid:26)on of the present case has been entrusted to the deponent by the Senior Superintendent of Renu Bala 2025.03.28 11:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-5929-2025 -2- Police, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar, vide order No. 1174-76 dated 11.02.2025. The deponent subsequently received the case file on 12.02.2025. Upon receipt of the file, the deponent called the Sta(cid:26)on House Officer, Police Sta(cid:26)on City Balachaur, and perused the record. AAer perusal of the record, it is revealed that a complaint dated 14.11.2024 was made by the complainant Ravinder Kumar against the pe(cid:26)(cid:26)oners inter-alia on the allega(cid:26)ons that the pe(cid:26)(cid:26)oners had fraudulently induced the complainant into an agreement to sell dated 11.08.2011 for a land measuring 43 kanals 3 marlas at a considera(cid:26)on of Rs.71,50,000/- per acre, amoun(cid:26)ng to Rs.3,85,65,314/- in total. The complainant further stated that he had paid an earnest money of Rs.70 lakhs viz. including Rs.10 lakhs through cheque and Rs.60 lakhs in cash, and the date for execu(cid:26)on of the sale deed was fixed as 10.08.2012. However, the accused neither executed the sale deed nor returned the amount and thereby commi<ed chea(cid:26)ng and criminal breach of trust." 4. Counsel for the pe(cid:26)(cid:26)oners submits that the pe(cid:26)(cid:26)oners have voluntary handed over a demand draA of Rs.10 lacs, subject to all just excep(cid:26)ons to the counsel for the complainant, who handed over the same to the complainant who is present in Court. He further prays for bail by imposing any stringent condi(cid:26)ons and contends that pre-trial incarcera(cid:26)on would cause an irreversible injus(cid:26)ce to the pe(cid:26)(cid:26)oners and their family. 5. 6. State counsel opposes the bail. It would be appropriate to refer to the following por(cid:26)ons of the reply, which read as follows: "(i) Pe(cid:26)(cid:26)oners had obtained three loans from different banks against the same property in ques(cid:26)on and without clearing the loans, entered into an agreement to sell the same property with the complainant and received Rs.70 lakhs from the complainant but neither they returned the money nor executed sale deed. (ii) Pe(cid:26)(cid:26)oners through their GPA Sandeep Singh again entered into an agreement dated 24.05.2017 to sell this very property with Subhash Gandhi and Rupneet Singh and obtained Rs.1,10,81,875/- as earnest money but neither they returned the money nor executed sale deed. (iii)
Decision
stand disposed of. 26.03.2025 renubala Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable: Yes/No Yes/No ( ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE Renu Bala 2025.03.28 11:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document