Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ramandeep Ram vs State Of Punjab on 7 November, 2025
CRM-M--62341-2025 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
106 CRM-M-62341-2025
Date of decision: 07.11.202
.2025
Ramandeep Ram
....Petitioner
V/s
State of Punjab
....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL
Present: Mr. D.S. Virk, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Amit Goyal, Additional Advocate General, Punjab.
Mr. Amandeep Singh, Advocate for the complainant.
*****
SUMEET GOEL,
GOEL J. (Oral)
1. Present petition has been filed on behalf of the petitio petitioner ner seeking grant of anticipatory/pre-arrest anticipatory/pre arrest bail under Sections 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter to be referred as 'BNSS') in FIR No.105 dated 12.12.2024 registered for offences punishable under Sections 281, 106 of the BNS, 2023 2023 (Sections 105, 336(2), 337, 238 of BNS, 2023 added later on) at Police Station Phase Phase-8, 8, District SAS Nagar.
2. The FIR in the present case was registered on the basis of a statement made by the complainant;
complainant; inter alia, alleging that he had retired as Chief Engineer from the Public Works Department, Himachal Pradesh Pradesh.. His son, namely Maninderjit Singh,, is serving as Commandant (JG) in the Indian Coast Guard at Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam, while his daughter daughter-in-law, Geeta Garung,, resides at House No. 2566, Sector 69, Mohali,, on rent alongwith her two children -- son Arnav (aged about 9 years) and daughter Aradhya (deceased), aged about 7 years.
years. The complainant stated that he had come to 1 of 8 ::: Downloaded on - 12-11-2025 07:15:19 ::: CRM-M--62341-2025 2 Mohali to meet his grandchildren. On the day of occurrence,, the complainant, along with with his grandchildren, went to a park situated in front of their residence. At about 4:30 PM PM, his granddaughter Aradhya (deceased), after finishing play, started walking back towards the house, (deceased), while the complainant followed with his grandson. At that time time, an electric three-wheeler wheeler, driven by co-accused accused Lovepreet Singh Singh,, allegedly came from the right side in a rash and negligent manner at a high speed speed,, and struck the minor girl. Due to the impact, the child fell on the road and sustained severe head injuries.
injurie . She was immediately rushed to Mayo Hospital, Sector 69, Mohali,, from where she was referred to Fortis Hospital, Phase 8, Mohali, Mohali but unfortunately, she succumbed to her injuries during treatment. Consequently, the instant FIR was registered and investig investigation ation commenced.
commenced During the course of investigation, co-accused accused Lovepreet Singh produced a learning driving licence, licence, which, upon verification, was found to be forged.
forged Accordingly, Sections 106, 336(2), 337 and 238 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 were added, and Lovepreet Singh was arrested on 11.02.2025.
11.02.2025 In his disclosure statement, he claimed to have procured the forged licence from an unidentified person outside the Mohali Courts Courts, but was unable to provide any name or description of such individual dduring uring investigation.
After completion of investigation, a challan was presented against co-
co accused Lovepreet Singh on 17.03.2025 17.03.2025.. Subsequently, during further investigation, the said co-accused co accused made a supplementary statement,, alleging that the forged licence licence had been prepared by the present petitioner, namely Ramandeep Ram.
Ram Based on this disclosure statement statement,, the petitioner was nominated as an accused in the present case.
2 of 8 ::: Downloaded on - 12-11-2025 07:15:20 ::: CRM-M--62341-2025 3
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case solely on the basis of a supplementary statement made by co co-accused accused Lovepreet Singh, which came to light after an inordinate delay of more than nine months from the registration of the FIR. It is submitted that the pe petitioner is completely innocent and has no nexus whatsoever with the alleged accident or the forged licence in question.
question Learned counsel has further argued that the alleged forged driving licence was stated to be valid for the period 25.04.2024 to 24.10.2024, 24.10.20 , whereas the incident occurred on 12.12.2024, 12.12.2024 i.e., after the expiry of the said licence, licence, thereby rendering the allegations against the petitioner inherently untenable untenable.. It is further submitted that the petitioner, who runs a small mobile repair shop und under er the name and style of "Raman Telecom & Repair," has been falsely implicated due to personal enmity,, as the co-accused co accused Lovepreet Singh had allegedly defaulted in payment of installments for a mobile phone purchased from the petitioner.
petitioner Learned counsel has has additionally submitted that there exists no direct, circumstantial, or corroborative evidence linking the petitioner to the preparation or use of the forged licence. It is further contended that nothing remains to be recovered from the possession of the petitioner, and therefore, his custodial interrogation is neither warranted nor justified justified. It is next submitted by the learned counsel that the petitioner is ready to join the investigation and hence no useful purpose would be served by sending him behind the bars. On the basis of the aforementioned submissions, the grant of the instant petition is entreated for.
3 of 8 ::: Downloaded on - 12-11-2025 07:15:20 ::: CRM-M--62341-2025 4
4. Per contra, contra, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, submitting that the peti petitioner tioner has been specifically named by the co-accused co accused as the individual responsible for preparing the forged learning driving licence licence,, which was subsequently used by the co-accused co accused at the time of the accident. According to learned State counsel, the said licence li has been duly verified during investigation and found to be forged, forged, thereby substantiating the allegation of fabrication of a government document. It is further contended that the act of preparing and supplying a forged government licence constitutes a serious and cognizable offence,, which necessitates comprehensive and meticulous investigation.
investigation Learned State counsel has emphasized that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is imperative to unravel the entire chain of persons involved in the preparation, ration, procurement, and circulation of forged driving licences and to ascertain whether the petitioner has been engaged in similar unlawful activities. It is submitted that the investigation is still at a crucial stage stage,, and that the grant of anticipatory bail at this juncture would seriously impede the process of fair and effective investigation investigation. On the basis of this submission, submission the dismissal of the instant petition is prayed for.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the complainant has vociferously opposed the instant petition by raising submissions in tandem with the State counsel.
6. I have heard the learned counsel for the rival parties and have gone through the available record of the case.
7. As per the case put forth in the FIR in question, serious allegations have undeniably been levelled against the petitioner petitioner.. It emerges 4 of 8 ::: Downloaded on - 12-11-2025 07:15:20 ::: CRM-M--62341-2025 5 from the record that on the alleged day of occurrence occurrence,, the complainant, alongwith his grandson and granddaughter, was returning from the park when the offending vehicle (an electric ric three three-wheeler),, being driven at a high speed in a rash and negligent manner manner,, struck the granddaughter of the complainant, resulting in her death.. From the material collected during investigation, it has come to light that a forged learning driving lice licence was produced by co-accused co Lovepreet Singh Singh,, which, upon verification, was found to be fake. The supplementary disclosure statement of the said co-
co accused specifically names the present petitioner as the person who prepared the forged licence.
licence Though thee petitioner disputes this version and asserts false implication, implication the veracity of such a disclosure and the extent of the petitioner's involvement are matters of investigation and evidence, evidence which cannot be adjudicated or conclusively determined at the stage of consideration of a pre-arrest pre bail plea.. The allegations in the FIR,, coupled with the investigative findings thus far, far, reveal a prima facie case involving the preparation of a forged official document document, which was allegedly used in the commission of an offence resulting in the tragic death of a minor child.
child The investigation is stated to be ongoing ongoing,, particularly with respect to identifying other persons who may be part of a larger racket engaged in the fabrication and circulation of forged government documents.. Such offences are grave and exceptional in nature, nature, and their prevalence poses a serious threat to public safety and the integrity of official institutions institutions.. Accordingly, this Court is of the view that the nature and gravity of the allegations warrant rrant a stern judicial approach, approach, so as to ensure that individuals understand the severe legal consequences of engaging in such unlawful acts 5 of 8 ::: Downloaded on - 12-11-2025 07:15:20 ::: CRM-M--62341-2025 6
8. The plea of false implication based on an alleged monetary dispute with the co-accused co cused cannot be assessed at tthis his stage without evidence. Furthermore, the investigation is still at a crucial stage and the custodial interrogation of the petitioner may be necessary to unearth the racket involved in preparation of forged documents. The petitioner is yet to be arrested arrested and the grant of anticipatory bail at this stage may prejudice the ongoing investigation. The apprehension expressed by the prosecution that the petitioner, if released on bail, may abscond or attempt to influence witnesses also appears to be not without basis. Given the seriousness of the offence, the stage of investigation and the possibility of tampering with evidence or obstructing justice, this Court are of the view that the petitioner does not deserve the concession of bail at this juncture. Moreov Moreover, in n view of the serious allegations, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is indispensable and crucial for unearthing the broader conspiracy and identifying the other accomplices that may be within the exclusive knowledge of the petitioner. Moreover, the grant of anticipatory bail at this premature stage may seriously prejudice the ongoing investigation and potentially result in tampering with evidence or influencing material witnesses.
9. It is befitting to mention here that while considering a plea for grant of anticipatory bail, the Court has to equilibrate between safeguarding individual rights and protecting societal interest(s). The Court ought to reckon with the magnitude and nature of the offence; the role attributed to the accused; the need for fair and free investigation as also the deeper and 6 of 8 ::: Downloaded on - 12-11-2025 07:15:20 ::: CRM-M--62341-2025 7 wide impact of such alleged iniquities on the society. A profitable reference in this regard is being made to the dicta passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court titled as State v. Anil Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 : 1997 SCC (Cri) 1039,, the Supreme Supreme Court held as under, relevant whereof reads as under:
"6. We find force in the submission of CBI that custodial interrogation is qualitatively more elicitation-oriented oriented than questioning a suspect who is well-ensconced ensconced with a favourable order under Section 438 of the Code. In a case like this, effective interrogation of a suspected person is of tremendous advantage in disinterring many useful informations and also materials which would have been concealed. Success in such interrogation would elude if the suspected cted person knows that he is well protected and insulated by a pre-
pre arrest bail order during the time he is interrogated. Very often interrogation in such a condition would reduce to a mere ritual. The argument that the custodial interrogation is fraught wi with th the danger of the person being subjected to third-degree degree methods need not be countenanced, for, such an argument can be advanced by all accused in all criminal cases. The Court has to presume that responsible police officers would conduct themselves in a responsible manner and that those entrusted with the task of disinterring offences would not conduct themselves as offenders.
offenders."
At this stage, there is no material on record to hold that prima facie case is not made out against the petitioner. The material ial which has come on record and preliminary investigation, appear to establish a reasonable basis for the accusation of the petitioner. Thus, it is not appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, as it would necessarily cause impediment in effective effective investigation.
10. Accordingly, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner does not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail in the factual milieu of the case in hand. Moreover, custodial in interrogation terrogation of the petitioner may be necessary for an effective investigation & to unravel the truth. The petition is, thus, devoid of merits and is hereby dismissed.
7 of 8 ::: Downloaded on - 12-11-2025 07:15:20 ::: CRM-M--62341-2025 8
11. Nothing said hereinabove shall be deemed to be an expression of opinion upon merits of the case/investigation.
12. Pending nding application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off.
(SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE November 07, 2025 Ajay Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No 8 of 8 ::: Downloaded on - 12-11-2025 07:15:20 :::