Punjab-Haryana High Court
Rana Singh vs State Of Punjab on 28 February, 2025
Author: Manjari Nehru Kaul
Bench: Manjari Nehru Kaul
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:028782
216.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM
CRM-M-984-2025
Date of decision: 28.02.2025
Rana Singh .... Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab .... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL
Present: Mr. Lakshay Bector, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Navdeep Singh, DAG, Punjab.
------
MANJARI NEHRU KAUL,
KAUL J. (ORAL)
The instant petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, pending trial, in case FIR No.3 No.31,, dated 14.10.2024, 14.10.2024 under Sections 7, 7-A, A, 12 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 as amended vide Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Ac Act,, 2018,, registered at Police Station S Vigilance Bureau, Ludhiana.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even as per the case of the prosecution, no recovery of bribe was effected from the petitioner. Rather, as per the allegations levelled, out of the total illegal gratification tion of Rs.65,000/-, Rs.65,000/ Rs.35,000/- has been handed directly to co co--
accused, Gurnam Singh (Patwari), with the remaining Rs.30,000/ Rs.30,000/- was alleged to have been paid to the petitioner. Learned counsel has submitted 1 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 01-03-2025 19:23:16 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:028782 CRM-M-984-2025 -2- that since the investigation in the present case is complete, further incarceration of the petitioner would serve no useful purpose as the entire case of the prosecution hinges on documentary evidence which is now already part of the challan. It has also been submitted that since the charges have not yet been framed coupled with the fact that as many as 08 prosecution witnesses have been cited, the possibility of the trial concluding in the near future does not arise.
Per contra, learned State counsel while opposing the prayer and submissions made by the counsel opposite, has, on instructions, not disputed the custody period of the petitioner nor has he disputed that the investigation in the present case stands concluded with the charge-sheet having been presented before the learned Special Court. However, learned State counsel has reiterated the contents of the FIR, annexed as Annexure P-1, which stands reproduced hereinunder:-
"Chief Officer, PS Vigilance Bureau Ludhiana Range, Ludhiana. Jai Hind, Today I DSP was present in my office when I received a complaint no.387/2021 Ludhiana against Gurnam Singh Patwari and others, in regards to verification report to file a case at the Head Office Vigilance Punjab SAS Nagar WB, through Letter No.40369/VB, S-10 dated 10-10- 2024, Senior Captain Police, was received via diary no.4523 dated 14-10-2024 in the office of Vigilance Bureau Ludhiana Range, Ludhiana. On which the Senior Captain Police Vigilance Bureau Range Ludhiana had written to the DSP Range-2 Vigilance Bureau Ludhiana, to register case and Investigate Please SD/ SSP. The facts of which are as such, from investigation of the Complaint No. 387/2021 Ludhiana it has been found that Sarabjit Singh S/o Mr. Swaran Singh Rio Village Dule, District Ludhiana, Ludhiana, had purchased one marla vacant plot at Village Dulea, which fell within the red line, dated 06.11.2020 from Harbans Singh S/o Bachan Singh Rio village Dulay through full and final payment. In this regard, Sarabjit Singh went to meet the Patwari at Tehsil
2 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 01-03-2025 19:23:16 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:028782 CRM-M-984-2025 -3- Office, Gill Road, Ludhiana, where he met persons named Rana and Buta who made him meet with Gurnam Singh Patwari and he informed the District Patwari Gurnam Singh about the plot he had purchased, stating that the said plot falls within the red line. He wanted to have legal ownership of it on papers, so Gumam Singh Patwari demanded one lakh rupees from him in exchange of doing this work. On Sarabjit Singh's pleading, Gurnam Singh Patwari asked to pay the money in instalments. On 10.11.2020, Gurnam Singh Patwari saw the plot purchased by Sarabjit Singh, at that time Buta Singh and Rana were also present with Gurnam Singh Patwari. After checking the location, Rana took Rs. 15,000/- from Sarabjit Singh and gave it to Gurnam Singh Patwari. After about a week, Sarabjit Singh called Patwari Gurnam Singh for his work, then he called Sarabjit Singh at Tehsil Gill Ludhiana and obtained Rs.35,000/- from him. Then after about 10-12 days, Buta Singh and Rana Singh agent along with Gurnam Singh Patwari reached the Kand Bridge Canal where Rana Singh called Sarabjit Singh to Kand Canal Bridge and took Rs. 15,000/- from him and handed it over to Gumam Patwari. During verification, from the statement dated 10.05.2022 and from the CD transcript of the audio recording submitted by Sarabjit Singh, it was found that agent Buta Singh, agent Rana and Gurnam Singh Patwari had demanded Rs. 1 lakh from Sarabjit Singh for transferring of the property that he had purchased in his own name from the name of the first owner. Demanding Rs.1 Lakh in return for registering transfer, out of which a total of Rs.65,000/- is proved to have been already paid as bribe. By doing so (1) Gurnam Singh Patwari (2) Agent Buta Singh son of Late Budh Singh resident of village Cheeman, Tehsil Payal, District Ludhiana (3) Agent Rana Singh son of Mr. Sohan Singh resident of village Gill, ward no. 02, PS Dehlo, District Ludhiana, have committed offenses U/S 7, 7(A), 12 PC Act 1988 as amended by PC (Amendment Act) 2018. According to the above mentioned sections the ruqa has been written and to file case through case diary, it is being sent by the hand of DSP Pavan Kumar No. 17561 to the Police Station. The case number shall be informed after the case is registered. Special reports shall be issued. I, DSP am busy in investigation. Sign/- Shiv Chand Deputy Captain Police Vigilance Bureau Range-2 Ludhiana, Dated 14.10.2024"
On a pointed query put to the learned State counsel, he, on instructions from Inspector Goldy Virdi, has submitted that the petitioner is
3 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 01-03-2025 19:23:17 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:028782 CRM-M-984-2025 -4- not involved in any other criminal case, much less a case under the PC Act.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material placed on record.
The petitioner has been in custody since 14.10.2024. The investigation in the present case is complete as challan already stands presented. The trial is unlikely to conclude in the near future as the next date before the trial Court is 07.03.2025 when the charges are likely to be framed.
In the facts and circumstances as enumerated hereinabove, this Court deems it fit to extend the concession of bail to the petitioner.
Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed and the petitioner be admitted to bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. However, it is made clear that anything observed hereinabove shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
Needless to add, in case the petitioner misuses the concession of bail granted to him, the State would be at liberty to seek cancellation of the same.
(MANJARI NEHRU KAUL)
JUDGE
February 28, 2025
sanjeev
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
4 of 4
::: Downloaded on - 01-03-2025 19:23:17 :::