IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 14.01.2025 PARVEEN KUMAR ....Petitioner V/s STATE OF PUNJAB ....Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL Present: Mr. Preetinder Singh Ahluwalia, Advocate with Ms. Keerat Singh Dhillon, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr.Amit Rana, Sr.DAG, Punjab.

*****

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL)

1. The petitioner is seeking the concession of bail under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in case FIR No.214 dated 28.08.2024 under Sections 61(2), 336 and 340 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023 (wherein Sections 318, 338, 341 of the BNS and Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 were added later on)

registered at Police Station Tripuri, District Patiala.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was serving as a Clerk in the office of District Magistrate, Patiala and allegedly forged the signatures of the District Magistrate, Patiala and thereafter, issued a forged armed licence in favour of one Lovepreet Singh in lieu of Rs.10,000/- illegal gratification. Learned counsel has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case, investigation qua the petitioner is complete as not only the challan has been presented qua him but during investigation the petitioner had also given his specimen signatures to the Investigating Agency. Furthermore, it has been asserted that since the entire case of the prosecution hinges on documentary evidence which is already part of the challan, there can be no apprehension of the petitioner tampering with the said evidence. Still further, it has been brought to the notice of this Court that as many as 25 witnesses have been cited, however, after the charges were framed on 7^th January, 2025 none of them have been examined. Hence, the possibility of the trial concluding in the near future does not arise.

3. Per contra, learned State counsel while opposing the prayer and submissions made by the counsel opposite has not disputed that the petitioner has been in custody since 29^th August, 2024, investigation qua the petitioner is complete and not only the challan has been presented but even charges has been framed. However, learned State counsel has drawn the attention of this Court to the allegations levelled in the FIR which has been annexed as Annexure P-1 and reiterated the allegations levelled against the petitioner of having forged the signatures of the District Magistrate, Patiala and thereafter, having issued a forged fire arm licence in lieu of illegal gratification to one Lovepreet Singh.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant material placed on record.

5. The petitioner has been in custody since 29^th August, 2024 in a case resting on documentary evidence. The trial would take considerable time to conclude with none of the 25 witnesses having been examined till date. It has also not been disputed by the learned State counsel that the petitioner has no previous criminal antecedents.

6. In the facts and circumstances as enumerated hereinabove, this Court deems it fit to extend the concession of bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed and the petitioner be admitted to bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. However, it is made clear that anything observed hereinabove shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

8. Needless to add, in case the petitioner misuses the concession of bail granted to him, the State would be at liberty to seek cancellation of the same.

(MANJARI NEHRU KAUL)

January 14, 2025 JUDGE poonam Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No