The High Court · 2025

Mr. Nitish Garg, Advocate Present: Mr. for the petitioner. for t Mr. Amit Rana, Sr. DAG, Punjab. Mr. *** *** (cid:1) MANJARI NEH I NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL)

1. The petitioner is seeking the concess The 483 of oncession of bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Na iya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita in case

8.2024 in case FIR No.214 dated 28.08.2024 under Sections tions 61 (2), 336, 340, 318 of BN of the BNS, 2023 and Section 7 of the Prevention of Co of Corruption Act, 1988 as amended ended by Act of 2018 (later on added Sections 338, 340 38, 340 (2) of BNS, 2023 registered at tiala. red at Police Station Tripuri, Patiala.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner Lear er has tioner submits that the petitioner has been in custody s stody since 30.08.2024. No suspicion picion was raised qua the involvemen of the petitioner tioner in forging of signatures of the D uent to f the District Magistrate, subsequent to which an arms li rms licence was issued in favour of on s been r of one Lovepreet Singh. It has been contended that t that the petitioner came to be nomi ng the nominated as an accused during the interrogation of on of co-accused Parveen Kumar, C mar, Clerk in the office of Distric istrict Magistrate, Patia , Patiala, who claimed that signature Patiala natures of District Magistrate, Patiala had been forged forged by him after conspiring with fter, a with the petitioner and thereafter, a forged arms lice s licence had been issued to Lovepre ovepreet Singh in lieu of Rs.10,000/ 0,000/- PANKAJ KUMAR 2025.01.13 18:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh CRM-M No.651 o.65175 of 2024 -2- illegal gratificatio ification. Learned counsel for the peti t entire he petitioner further submits that entire case of the prose e prosecution is based on documenta eady a mentary evidence, which is already a part of the cha e challan, which already stands pr presented before the trial Cour Court concerned. It h . It has also been submitted that ed on that charges have been framed on

07.01.2025 and t and therefore, the trial is unlikely to ure, as kely to conclude in the near future, as none out of the 2 f the 25 prosecution witnesses cited, It has cited, have yet been examined. It has further been sub n submitted that in the aforesaid cir en the aid circumstances, more so, when the disclosure statem statement on the basis of which the pe d as an the petitioner has been arraigned as an accused has littl le evidentiary value, the petitioner titioner deserves to be enlarged on bail ail.

3. Per contra, learned State counsel Per er and unsel while opposing the prayer and submissions mad s made by the counsel opposite, has titioner has not disputed that the petitioner has been in custo custody since 30.08.2024, challan qu sented llan qua the petitioner stands presented and he was nom s nominated as an accused on the tement n the basis of a disclosure statement suffered by co- -accused Parveen Kumar. Howev e State owever, learned counsel for the State has submitted tha ted that after forging signatures of the la, the of the District Magistrate, Patiala, the co-accused had i had issued an arms licence in the na gh and the name of one Lovepreet Singh and during investigat estigation, it surfaced that the petition petitioner had conspired with the sa e said co-accused in the ffence. in the commission of alleged offence.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the I hav for the parties and perused the materia aterial record. placed on record.

5. The petitioner has been in custody The are no stody since 30.08.2024. There are no allegations in the in the FIR in question against the peti alleged he petitioner. The petitioner is alleged to be a conspir onspirator to the crime and even even the alleged demand of illega illegal gratification was n was not made by him but by the c ar. Be the co-accused Parveen Kumar. Be that as it may, in ay, in the facts and circumstances as ces as enumerated hereinabove, since PANKAJ KUMAR 2025.01.13 18:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh CRM-M No.651 o.65175 of 2024 -3- all the incriminat iminating material collected against th t of the inst the petitioner is already part of the challan, there ca ere can be no apprehension of the ith the of the petitioner tampering with the evidence, hence, ence, this Court deems it fit to admit t dmit the petitioner to bail.

6. Accordingly, the instant petition Acc ner be tition is allowed. The petitioner be admitted to bail o bail on his furnishing bail/surety bon ty bonds to the satisfaction of the Tria e Trial Court/Duty Mag Magistrate concerned. However, i ything ver, it is made clear that anything observed hereina ereinabove shall not be construed to ion on ed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the of the case.

7. Needless to add, in case the petitione Nee etitioner misuses the concession of bai of bail granted to him, th him, the State would be at liberty to se y to seek cancellation of the same. (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL AUL) JUDGE January 13, 202 Pankaj* , 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable : : Yes/No Yes/No PANKAJ KUMAR 2025.01.13 18:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh