IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-58964-2025 (O&M)

Date of decision: 01.12.2025 Baljinder Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present:- Mr. K. B. Raheja, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Roshandeep Singh, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. Amritpal Singh Gill, Advocate for the complainant/victim.

MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral)

1. CRM-48245-2025 Allowed as prayed for. Complainant is ordered to be impleaded as respondent No. 2 to this petition. Amended memo of parties be tagged at the appropriate place in the file.

2. CRM-42947-2025 Allowed as prayed for. Document is taken on record.

3.CRM-48244-2025 Allowed as prayed for.

Reply, filed on behalf of the complainant/victim, is taken on record.

4. Main Case Through the instant petition, filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), the petitioner seeks permission to go to England for a period of six months and for setting aside the order dated 03.09.2025, passed by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ludhiana in case FIR No. 62 dated 01.07.2024, registered under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC at Police Station Dehlon, District Ludhiana, whereby an application filed by the petitioner seeking aforementioned permission had been dismissed.

5. The petitioner has been booked in the aforementioned FIR on the allegations that the petitioner along with co-accused had hatched a conspiracy and had unlawfully taken into possession the original resolution register of Dera Harisar Sri Sri 108 Jagad Guru Dev Puri Ji Maharaj Trust and had tampered with and fabricated various resolutions and misused the bank account of the Trust to perpetuate their unlawful control of the management and assets of the Trust. During investigation, it has surfaced that the petitioner was the principal conspirator of the subject crime. The evidence collected during investigation conducted so far prima facie establishes active involvement of the petitioner in commission of subject offences. The case is still under investigation.

6. The petitioner had moved an application before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ludhiana seeking permission to travel to England for a period of six months on the grounds of attending the birthday and wedding anniversary of her daughter, which were falling on 29.10.2025 and 31.10.2025, respectively. The said application had been dismissed by the Court concerned by passing the impugned order. The operative part of the impugned order reads as under:

“I have heard Ld. Counsel for both the parties and have perused the case file including the report submitted by the SHO concerned and is of the considered view that no reasonable ground exits to allowed the present application. As per the reports submitted by the SHO concerned investigation of the present case file is still pending and therefore the presence of the accused may be required for investigation. Hence, the accused go abroad for a period of 6 months can hamper the investigation and therefore this court do not deem it proper to allow the present application. Same is hereby dismissed. Present papers be attached with the remand papers, if any pending. The case law sited by the applicant / accused are not applicable to the facts of the present case since in the present case investigation is still pending and final report is yet to be filed by the police.”

7. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned order is not sustainable in the eyes of law as while passing the same, the Court concerned did not take into consideration the factual matrix of the case and that he has been falsely implicated in the present case. The petitioner has not met his daughter for a long time. He is a man of means and owns agricultural land. He had filed an affidavit along with jamabandi of his land to the effect that he would return to India on 28.02.2026 but the