Harpreet Singh Vs State of Punjab

to the order dated 17.01.2025 passed by this Court, the petitioner has already joined the investigation and as such prayed for confirming the interim bail granted vide order dated 17.01.2025.

¶18

Learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Rakesh

¶19

Kumar, intimates the Court that the petitioner has joined investigation and

¶20

is neither required for further investigation nor for any custodial

¶21

interrogation.

¶22

KANIKA 2025.05.28 11:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

¶23

CRM-M-2249-2025 2

¶24

Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of complainant and filed memo of appearance, which is taken on record. He opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and prays for dismissal of the present petition.

¶25

During the course of hearing on 17.01.2025, following order

¶26

was passed:

¶27

“ 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further contends that the complainant was introduced to the petitioner by one Amanpreet Singh as he intended to go abroad and the petitioner through Avtar Singh introduced the complainant to M/s Real Tour and Travels. He contends that the amounts paid by the complainant were further transferred on the very same day by the petitioner to Avtar Singh. He submits that the instant FIR was got registered in 2019 and thereafter, compromise had been effected whereby the co-accused Amanpreet paid Rs. 3 lakhs, M/s Real Tour and Travels paid Rs.10 lakhs (Annexure P-3) and co-accused Avtar Singh paid Rs. 3 lakhs (Annexure P-4) and Rs. 1.8 lakhs (Annexure P-7) and the petitioner paid Rs.2.5 lakhs to the complainant. He contends that the co-accused Amanpreet Singh has been granted concession of bail vide Annexure P-8 and Avtar Singh has also been granted interim bail. Even the petition for quashing had been filed, however, the same had to be withdrawn. He contends that the petitioner is not having any criminal antecedents and is ready to join the investigation.

¶28

3. Notice of motion.

¶29

4. On the asking of the Court, Mr. Rajinder Singh Bhatta, DAG, Punjab, present in Court, accepts notice on

¶30

KANIKA 2025.05.28 11:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

¶31

CRM-M-2249-2025 3

¶32

behalf of the State-respondent and on instructions from ASI Balkaran Singh, has not disputed the factual matrix of the case and seeks time for filing reply.

¶33

5. Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate, has put in appearance on behalf of complainant to assist the learned State counsel and filed power of attorney, which is taken on record. He further submits that the matter can be amicably settled in the Mediation to which the learned counsel for the petitioner has no objection.

¶34

6. Accordingly, the matter is referred to Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court. Parties are directed to appear before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court on 28.01.2025 at 11.00 A.M.

¶35

7. To await report from Mediator, adjourned to 27.02.2025.

¶36

8. Reply be filed well before the date fixed with an advance copy to the counsel opposite.

¶37

9. In the meanwhile, the petitioner is hereby directed to join investigation within seven days from today and in the event of his arrest, he is ordered to be released on interim bail on his furnishing personal/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer. He shall also abide by conditions as envisaged under Section 482 (2) of BNSS, 2023. ”

¶38

Keeping in view the above submissions made by learned State counsel and the fact that the petitioner had joined the investigation consequent to the order dated 17.01.2025 passed by this Court, interim bail granted vide order dated 17.01.2025 is hereby confirmed, subject to conditions as envisaged under Section 482 (2) of BNSS, 2023. Further the

¶39

KANIKA 2025.05.28 11:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

¶40

CRM-M-2249-2025 4

¶41

petitioner is directed to join investigation as and when required in future by way of written notice for such purpose to be served by Investigating Officer of this case upon the petitioner; he will not tamper with the evidence nor will influence the witnesses and will not leave the country without prior permission of the Court.

¶42

The petition stands allowed.

¶43

It is made clear that anything contained hereinabove shall not

¶44

be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

¶45

27.05.2025 (SANJIV BERRY) kanika JUDGE

¶46

i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No ii) Whether reportable? Yes/No

¶47

KANIKA 2025.05.28 11:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

Harpreet Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harpreet Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Akashdeep Singh Vs State of Punjab

Avinash Gill Alias Avinash Kumar Alias Parotha Vs State of Punjab

Roop Singh Vs State of Haryana

Aslam Noor Vs State of Punjab

Balwant Kaur Vs State of Ut Chandigarh and Another

Gurjant Singh Alias Janta Vs State of Punjab