IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

207 Date of decision: 23.09.2025 Bagicha Singh ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY *****

Present : Mr. S.P.S. Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. B.S. Saroha, DAG Haryana *****

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.13 dated 30.04.2025 under Section 7C of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (as amended by P.C. Amendment Act, 2018) registered at Police Station Vigilance Bureau, Range Ferozepur, District Ferozepur.

2. On 09.07.2025, this Court had passed the following order:-

“Prayer in this petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.13 dated 30.04.2025 under Section 7C of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (as amended by P.C. Amendment Act, 2018) registered at Police Station Vigilance Bureau, Range Ferozepur, District Ferozepur.

Status report by way of affidavit of Gurinderjeet Singh, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilane Bureau, Unit Fazilka, District Fazilka, has been filed in the Court today which is taken on record subject to all just exceptions. A copy of the same has been supplied to the counsel opposite.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case, wherein he is alleged to have demanded illegal gratification while discharging his official duties, purportedly in collusion with one Gurmeet Singh, who was then serving as the Secretary under the MGNREGA Scheme.

While referring to the contents of the FIR, annexed as Annexure P-1, it is submitted that the version of the prosecution is inherently improbable and contrary to the operational framework of the MGNREGA Scheme. The Scheme mandates that all wage disbursements are to be made directly into the bank accounts of the registered labourers through electronic transfer. This mechanism eliminates any manual handling or scope for interference in the preparation of muster rolls or manipulation of wage payments.

In light of this statutory procedure, it has been asserted, that the allegation that the petitioner appointed fictitious labourers for the purpose of misappropriating funds stands on untenable and baseless grounds.

It has still further been submitted that the case of the prosecution hinges solely on a purported audio recording submitted by the complainant, allegedly implicating the petitioner. However, it is submitted that the said recording has been tampered with and is a doctored recording; its authenticity is highly questionable.

Without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner and contentions, and in order to demonstrate his bonafides, the petitioner voluntarily undertakes to cooperate fully with the ongoing investigation and is willing to provide his voice sample for forensic comparison with the impugned audio recording.

Adjourned to 23.09.2025.

Meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to join the investigation and appear before the investigating agency as and when called upon to do so by adhering to the undertaking given before this Court for providing his voice sample for forensic comparison. 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 482(2)

of the BNSS.”

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