IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Decided on: 27.02.2025 Gurpreet Singh Chahal …...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Present: Mr. Mandeep Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Mohit Kapoor, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

Mr. Saurav Bhatia, Advocate for the complainant.

****

SANJAY VASHISTH, J.

1. Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438 Cr.P.C.), is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:-

Name of FIR Date Section(s) Police Station Petitioner No.

(s)

Gupreet 0160 21.09.2024 420 IPC City Nawanshahar, SBS Singh Nagar, Punjab Chahal

2. On 26.12.2024, following order was passed:-

“ Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita,2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who has been booked for having committed the offence punishable under Section 420 IPC, in a case arising out of FIR No.0160, dated 21.09.2024, registered at Police Station City Nawanshahar, SBS Nagar, Punjab.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that he received Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees ten lacs) from complainant-Ramandeep Singh and the said amount was later transferred in the Bank account of the main accused-Ajay Gupta. By referring to the order dated 27.11.2024 (Annexure P-4),learned counsel for the petitioner submits that admittedly investigation has already been joined by the petitioner, however, on subsequent date, on account of non-appearance of the counsel for the petitioner, the anticipatory bail application was dismissed in default by the Sessions Court, hence petitioner is before this Court.

Notice of motion.

Mr. P.S. Bhandari, AAG-cum-PP, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State. He does not dispute the factum of joining of investigation by the petitioner as pointed out by the counsel for the petitioner during his submissions, however, learned State counsel submits that the amount is yet to be recovered.

List on 27.02.2025.

In the meanwhile, petitioner is directed to join the investigation as and when required to do so by the Investigating Agency.

In the event of his arrest, the petitioner shall be released on ad-interim bail, subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall be abide by all the conditions laid down under Section 438(2), Cr.PC.

Besides, petitioner would submit/surrender his passport before the Arresting Officer and an undertaking on oath that in case of leaving the country, he would seek prior permission from the Investigating Agency/concerned Court.”

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the petitioner had already joined investigation, even at the time of the pendency of his application for anticipatory bail before the Court of Sessions, yet again in pursuance to the directions of this Court, petitioner again went to the police station on his own to join investigation and to submit his required documents. He also submits that complainant namely; Ramandeep Singh Thiara has already compromised the dispute, in whose account the major part of the amount was credited, thus, submits that custodial interrogation of the petitioner would not serve any purpose of the prosecution and therefore, seeks confirmation of the interim bail.

4. On the other hand, learned State counsel while opposing the prayer of the petitioner submits that though petitioner had gone to the police Station, but he did not hand over the required documents such as Passport etc. Thus, demands for his custodial interrogation.

5. Learned counsel for the complainant also opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that actually there is no compromise with main accused namely, Ajay Gupta, therefore, prays for dismissal of the present petition.

6. I have considered the submissio