Rajinder Singh @ Harjinder Singh v. State of Punjab

ANOOP CHITKARA, J. By this Common judgment, all the captoned above pettons are taken up for disposal, for brevity facts are taken from CRM-M-51202-2024 as all the pettons relate to CRM-M-51202-2024 and other connected cases -2 FIR No. Dated Police Staton Sectons 176 05.09.2024 Kamboz, Tehsil 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-Batala, District B of IPC, 1860 Amritsar (Rural)

¶1The pettoner(s) apprehending arrest in the FIR captoned above has come up before this Court under Secton 482 of Bharatya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], seeking antcipatory bail.

¶2In all the bail pettons, three pettoners have clean antecedents except one pettoner, namely, Charanjit Singh Sarkaria has the following criminal history:- Sr. No. FIR No. Date/Year Offenses Police Staton

¶1163 03.07.2020 302/201/34 of IPC, Kamboj, District 1860 Amritsar

¶252 04.05.2022 336 of IPC and Kamboj, District Sectons 25/27 of Amritsar Arms Act

¶3The facts and allegatons are being taken from the translaton of FIR, which reads as follows: "To Hon'ble SSP Sahib, Amritsar Rural, Subject: Applicaton against (1) Ranjit Singh son of Gurmeet Singh resident of Village Jethuwal, Amritsar,

(2) Gurmeet Singh son of Harbhajan Singh resident of Village Jethuwal Amritsar, (3) Wife of Ranjit Singh (unnamed) in respect of playing fraud and cheatng obtaining Rs.9 Crores 9 Lakhs and 45 Lakhs and Rs.5 Crore total amount Rs.14 Crore and 45 Lakhs on the pretext of purchasing land. Mr. Ramesh Arora Managing Director Quality Pharmaceutcal Ltd., Majitha Road, Amritsar through Quality Pharmaceutcal Ltd. 6 Miles stone, Near Village Nang Kalan, Majitha Road Amritsar moved the following applicaton with allegatons that Quality Pharmaceutcal Limited deals in manufacturing of medicines. In the year 2021, The company have planned buy to some land in order to run the business, then both accused told the company that they have a lot of reputaton/recogniton in the Amritsar District and have good influence in an around Villages Jethuwal and Malluwal and they assured that they will purchase land collectvely in the same area in the name of Quality Pharmaceutcal Ltd. by executng sale deeds in favour of the company. In this regard an agreement/MOU with Ranjit Singh was executed by the company through one of its authorized person namely Neel Mani Khemka son of Sarwan Kumar resident of 361-A, Mall Road, Amritsar and this agreement/MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) was executed between Ranjit Singh and Neel Mani Khemka on behalf of Quality Pharmaceutcal Ltd. on

28.02.2021. 2. That as per the agreement/MOU the accused agreed to sell land measuring 50 Acres together No.25/26/27/39/40/42/57 from for Khasra sale consideraton of Rs.40 Lakhs per Acre and received Rs.9 Lakhs in cash and Rs.21 Lakhs in the shape of Cheque No.000861 on the same day 28.02.2021 and got the amount transferred in his account as such he received total Rs.9 Crores 9 Lakhs through bank transfer on various dates in his personal bank account. Similarly, accused no.2 with connivance of Renu Bala accused no.1 executed an agreement with company on 10.11.2021 for CRM-M-51202-2024 and other connected cases -3 selling a land totaling 108 Kanal 7 Marla and said Gurmeet Singh got transferred Rs.45 Lakhs in his account. In this regard, accused no.1 issued two post-dated Cheques bearing No.007520 dated 24.09.2022 for amount totaling Rs.8 Crore 85 Lakhs 58 Thousand 5 Hundred of Axis bank and second Cheque No.007516 dated 26.09.2022 totalling amountng Rs.5 Crore of Axis Bank in favour of complainant company. 4. That both the accused have not purchased any land in the favor of the company and on the contrary have escaped with all the money of the company. The company presented the Cheques for encashment in their bank accounts but both of Cheques were dishonored due to insufficient funds. Regarding this the company has already filed a complaint in the court against the accused and Ranjit Singh did not appear in the court as such the Hon'ble Court Smt. Neelam JMIC declared accused Ranjit Singh as proclaimed offender vide order dated 12.06.2024. 5. That whenever the company transferred any amount in the account of accused, the said accused got the money transferred to his wife's account and to Nakash Film Producton Company, which reveal that the above accused Ranjit Singh had invested a huge amount in the said Nakash Film Producton Company and became the producer of Punjabi Movie Cheta Singh. 6. The above accused persons have connived with each other in usurping the company's money by playing and are now hiding themselves. Therefore, it is requested that in view of above circumstances, legal acton be taken against them by registering an FIR against the three accused for commiIng fraud. Yours thankfully."

¶4Counsel for the pettoner(s) submits that there is no allegatons of cheatng against the pettoner(s). All the pettoner(s) are in relaton with the main accused-Ranjit Singh and they were also present for executon of agreement. 'The pettoner(s)' counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent conditon and contends that further pre-trial incarceraton would cause an irreversible injustce to the pettoners and their families.

¶5The State's counsel opposes bail and states that there is sufficient evidence pointng towards the pettoner(s)' involvement and conspiracy and the pettoner(s) are not enttled to bail as custodial interrogaton is required. Counsel for the complainant also opposes the bail

¶6It would be appropriate to refer to the following portons of the reply, which read as follows: "That the role of the pettoner as per the FIR is that he was aware of the complete fraud being commiLed by his family members with the company as he was present at the tme of the executon of the MoU as well as the Agreement with the Company. The cash was given by the Company to Ranjit Singh & family in his presence and he even went to the extent of showing the land to the persons of the Company to make them believe in the entre fraud. Hence it is clear from the bare reading of the FIR that the Pettoner has been actvely involved in the fraud commiLed with the Company and has played a vital role in the same." CRM-M-51202-2024 and other connected cases -4 REASONING:

¶7An analysis of the arguments, which led to the outcome that on the face of the FIR, pettoner(s) were not named as persons who had taken any money. Main accused is Ranjit Singh, who is brother-in-law of pettoner-Rajinder Singh @ Harjinder Singh, nephew of pettoner Kulwant Singh, son of pettoner Sukhwinder Kaur, brother of pettoner Charanjit Singh.

¶8Thus, the evidence against the pettoner(s) are on much lower footngs than against the main accused. As such, consideraton for grantng bail to the pettoner(s) would be entrely different than while considering the bail applicaton of the main accused.

¶9Pre-trial incarceraton should not be a replica of post-convicton sentencing. The evidence might be prima facie sufficient to launch prosecuton or to frame charges, but this Court is not considering the evidence at that stage, but is analyzing it for the sake of antcipatory bail. An analysis of the above does not justfy custodial interrogaton or pre-trial incarceraton.

¶10Given the above, the penal provisions invoked coupled with the prima facie analysis of the nature of allegatons and the other factors peculiar to this case, there would be no justfiability for custodial interrogaton or the pre-trial incarceraton at this stage, subject to the compliance of terms and conditons mentoned in this order. Without commentng on the case's merits, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and for the reasons mentoned above, the pettoner makes a case for bail. This order shall come into force from the tme it is uploaded on this Court's official webpage.

¶11The investgaton indicates that the pettoner(s) are not the main accused, so the pettoner(s) bail shall not be treated as a precedent for grantng bail to the other co-accused with a higher role.

¶12Given above, provided the pettoner(s) are not required in any other case, the pettoner(s) shall be released on antcipatory bail in the FIR captoned above subject to furnishing bonds to the satsfacton of the Arrestng Officer, and if the maKer is before a Court, then the concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before acceptng the surety, the concerned Officer/Court must be satsfied that if the accused fails to appear, such surety can produce the accused.

¶13While furnishing a personal bond, the pettoner(s) shall menton the following personal identficaton details:

¶1AADHAR number

¶2Passport number (If available) and when the aKestng officer/court considers it appropriate or Renu Bala considers the accused a flight risk. I attest to the accuracy and3. Mobile number (If available) CRM-M-51202-2024 and other connected cases -5

¶4E-Mail id (If available)

¶14This order is subject to the pettoner's complying with the following terms. 1 5. The pettoner(s) are directed to join the investgaton 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 Investgator. The pettoner(s) shall be in deemed custody for Secton 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872/ Secton 23 of BSA, 2023. The pettoner(s) shall join the investgaton as and when called by the Investgatng Officer or any Superior Officer and shall cooperate with the investgaton at all further stages as required. In the event of failure to do so, the prosecuton will be open to seeking cancellaton of the bail. During the investgaton, the pettoner(s) shall not be subjected to third-degree, indecent language, inhuman treatment, etc.

¶16In case the Investgator/Officer-In-Charge of the concerned Police Staton arraigns another secton of any penal offense in this FIR, and if the new secton prescribes a maximum sentence that is not greater than the sectons mentoned above, then this bail order shall be deemed to have also been passed for the newly added secton(s). However, suppose the newly inserted sectons prescribe a sentence exceeding the maximum sentence prescribed in the sectons mentoned above; then, in that case, the Investgator/Officer-In-Charge shall give the pettoner(s) notce of a minimum of seven days, providing an opportunity to avail the remedies available in law.

¶17This bail is conditonal, and the foundatonal conditon is that if the pettoner(s) indulge in any non-bailable offense, the State may file an applicaton for cancellaton of this bail before the Sessions Court, which shall be at liberty to cancel this bail.

¶18Any observaton made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments.

¶19A certfied copy of this order would not be needed for furnishing bonds, and any Advocate for the Pettoner(s) can download this order along with case status from the official web page of this Court and aKest it to be a true copy. If the aKestng officer wants to verify its authentcity, such an officer can also verify its authentcity and may download and use the downloaded copy for aKestng bonds.

¶20Pettons are allowed in terms mentoned above. All pending applicatons, if any, stand disposed of

28.03.2025 ( ANOOP CHITKARA) renubala JUDGE 2025.04.08 17:08 Whether reportable: Yes/No

CRM-M-51202-2024 and other connected cases -1 215 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 1) CRM-M-51202-2024 Reserved on: 18.03.2025 Prononced on:28.03.2025 RAJINDER SINGH @ HARJINDER SINGH ...PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB ...RESPONDENT 2) CRM-M-54117-2024 KULWANT SINGH ...PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB ...RESPONDENT 3) CRM-M-53055-2024 SUKHWINDER KAUR SARKARIA ...PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB ...RESPONDENT 4) CRM-M-61781-2024 CHARANJIT SINGH SARKARIA ...PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB ...RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Argued by: Mr. Inderjit Sharma, Advocate for the pettoner in CRM-M-51202-2024. Mr. Satbir Singh Gill, Advocate for the pettoner(s) in CRM-M-61781, 54117 and 53055-2024. Mr. Akshay Kumar, Asst. AG, Punjab Ms. Isha Goel, Advocate for the complainant. ****