IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

215 Date of decision: 02.09.2025 Avtar Singh ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY *****

Present : Mr. P.S. Ahluwalia and Mr. Keerat Dhillon, Advocates for the petitioner Mr. M.S. Bajwa, DAG Punjab *****

AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL)

1. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 BNSS for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.2 dated 21.01.2025 under Sections 13(1)(b) and 13(2) of The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, registered at Police Station Vigilance Bureau, District Ferozepur.

2. On 13.02.2025 and 22.05.2025, this Court had passed the following orders:-

13.02.2025 “Petitioner is seeking the concession of anticipatory bail in FIR No.2 dated 21.01.2025 under Sections 13(1)(b) and 13(2) of The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, registered at Police Station Vigilance Bureau, District Ferozepur.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends, inter alia, that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present FIR for allegedly accumulating assets amounting to ₹54,28,924/- disproportionate to his known sources of income. He argues that the Vigilance Bureau arbitrarily selected the check period from 31.12.2018 to 01.01.2023 without providing any rational justification, thereby acting on their own whims and fancies to falsely implicate the petitioner.

It is further submitted that ₹43 lakh of the alleged excess amount of ₹54,28,924/- pertains to the valuation of the ancestral house of the petitioner, which was renovated in 2014, leading to an inflated valuation. Additionally, learned counsel has emphasized that there is an unexplained delay of as much as eight years in the registration of the FIR in question.

Notice of motion.

On the asking of the Court, Mr. H.S. Deol, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent and prays for time to file reply.

Adjourned to 18.03.2025.

No coercive steps be taken against the petitioner till the next date of hearing.”

22.05.2025 “Learned State counsel has filed reply by way of affidavit of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance Bureau, Unit Fazilka on behalf of the respondent-State in the Court today, which is taken on record subject to all just exceptions. A copy thereof has been supplied to the counsel opposite.

Adjourned to 02.09.2025.

Meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to join the investigation and appear before the investigating agency, as and when called upon to do so. In the event of his arrest, he shall be admitted to interim bail on his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall abide by the terms and conditions as envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C./482(2) of BNSS, 2023.”

3. Learned counsel submits that in pursuance of the afore-mentioned order, the petitioner has not only joined investigation but also fully cooperated with the investigating agency. He further submits that in case the investigating agency requires the petitioner to appear, he shall make himself available without demur.

4. Learned State counsel on instructions affirms the factum of joining the investigation by the petitioner and cooperating with the investigating agency. He also submits that at this stage, the petitioner is not required for further custodial interrogation.

5. In view of the above and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, anticipatory bail petition filed by the petitioner is allowed and the orders dated 13.02.2025/22.05.2025 granting interim relief/bail to him, are hereby made absolute, subject to compliance of conditions as specified under Section 438(2) Cr. P.C.

6. However, it is made clear that if the petitioner fails to join and cooperate with the investigating agency as and when required, the State would be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of the present anticipatory bail granted to him.

(AMAN CHAUDHARY)

JUDGE

02.09.2025 M.Kamra