SUKHDEV SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Sec. 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short "BNSS") seeking regular bail in case bearing FIR No.10, dtd. 30/1/2025, registered under Ss. 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) of the BNS, at Police Station City Zira, District Ferozepur.

(2.) The aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of complaint submitted by the complainant - Bogha Singh alleging that he was interested to buy some land and for that purpose, he had contacted accused Satpal Singh, who was a property agent in the month of August, 2024. Accused Satpal Singh and his brother Sukhdev Singh had introduced him with one female by representing that she was Rupinder Kaur wife of Inderjit Singh, resident of village Balkhandi and was interested to sell her land situated at village Attari. A deal had been struck with the intervention of Satpal Singh, Sukhdev Singh and Satnam Singh to purchase 68 kanals and 01 marla of land of abovesaid Rupinder Kaur for a total sale consideration of Rs.30,25,000.00 per acre. Written agreement was executed on 4/10/2024. An amount of Rs.20,40,000.00 had been given by the complainant to abovesaid Rupinder Kaur in the presence of the present petitioner and the above named Satpal Singh and Satnam Singh. Sale deed was to be executed and registered on 6/1/2025. Another amount of Rs.9,15,000.00 had also been paid by the complainant to the vendor in the presence of the present petitioner. However, no sale deed was executed in his favour and lateron, the complainant came to know that the petitioner in connivance with the above named Satpal Singh, Satnam Singh and one female, who impersonated her as Rupinder Kaur, had played fraud upon him and caused wrongful loss of the aforementioned amount to him. The actual Rupinder Kaur had never agreed to sell her land to him. On the basis of his complaint, the aforementioned FIR was registered. Investigation proceedings were initiated. The petitioner was arrested on 22/7/2025. Co-accused Satnam Singh, Satpal Singh and Rupinder Kaur could not be apprehended and are yet to be arrested.

(3.) It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case. He was simply an attesting witness to the agreement to sell. He is not the beneficiary of any transaction as no money was given to him by the complainant. He was unaware of the fact that the female who had appeared at the time of execution of agreement to sell was not Rupinder Kaur. He is in custody since long. Investigation qua him stands completed and he is not required for further investigation. The trial will take considerable time to conclude. He has clean antecedents. His further incarceration would not serve any useful purpose. It is, therefore, urged that the petitioner deserves to be released on bail.