LAWS(P&H)-2022-1-80

SUKHCHAIN SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

Decided On January 13, 2022
SUKHCHAIN SINGH Appellant
V/S
STATE OF PUNJAB Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been filed under Sec. 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR bearing No.18 dtd. 29/1/2021, under Ss. 420, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station Sadar Kotkapura, District Faridkot.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is in custody from 18/3/2021; the investigation of the case is already complete; the challan has been presented under Sec. 173 Cr.P.C. before the learned competent Court on 13/5/2021 and thereafter charges have been framed on 26/7/2021. He has submitted that it is a case where the allegations against the petitioner were that he alongwith some other co accused had taken some amount of money for conducting a committee and the same was not returned back to the complainant. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the complainant alongwith some other complainants has falsely implicated the petitioner in the said FIR and at the most, it is a case of dispute of civil liability if any and since the petitioner has faced incarceration of more than 09 months, the investigation of the case is already complete and no recovery is to be effected from the petitioner, he may be considered for the grant of regular bail. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that other co-accused namely Harpreet Singh has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in CRM-M29195-2021 on 13/9/2021 vide Annexure P-9. Simlarly, other co-accused namely Gurmeet Kaur has also been granted anticipatory bail vide Annexure P-7.

(3.) Learned State counsel has submitted that so far as the custody of the petitioner is concerned, the same is correct and it is also correct that the investigation of the case is already complete and the challan has been presented and thereafter the charges have been framed on 26/7/2021. He has, however, submitted that it is a case where the petitioner has allegedly taken some amount for conducting a committee and thereafter he has not returned the amount and, therefore, the present FIR was lodged.