GURDEEP SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Prayer in this petition filed under Sec. 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, in case FIR No.0007, No. dtd. 16/1/2021,, under Ss. 406, 420, 120-B of IPC, registered at Police Station City Hoshiarpur, District Hoshiarpur.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the ppetitioner etitioner has been in custody since 22/11/2023 in a magisterial trial. Even though investigation is complete and challan was presented way back on 12/2/2024, the trial has not not made any headway thereafter, as charges have not yet been framed. Learned counsel counsel submits that in the circumstances, more so when as many as 46 witnesses have been cited by the prosecution, the possibility of the trial concluding in the near future does not arise. Learned counsel has reiterated his submissions made on the last date oof hearing that the petitioner was not the Director of the Company i.e. M/s Kim Infrastructure and Developers Limited (hereinafter referred to as the 'Company') which had allegedly cheated the complainant and others of an amount of approximately Rs.4.00 crores; he was merely an employee of the said Company. In support, learned counsel has drawn the attention of this Court to Annexures P-7 and P-8. A prayer has, therefore, been made for extending the concession of bail to the petitioner.

(3.) Per contra, learned State counsel, while opposing the prayer and submissions made by the counsel opposite, on instructions from ASI Satnam Singh, has not disputed the custody period of the petitioner or the stage of trial. However, learned State counsel, while drawing the attention of this Court to the affidavit dtd. 12/11/2024 of Dev Dutt Sharma, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub-Division City, District Hoshiarpur, has submitted that the petitioner was an active participant in the crime in question and had been managing the affairs of the Company, which had duped a number of investors on the pretext of doubling their invested amount in the next six years. It has been further submitted by the learned State counsel that the petitioner is facing trial in five other criminal cases of identical nature, which stands detailed in para 9 of the affidavit.