Rajiv Dutta Alias Rajeev Datta Vs State of Punjab

Present petition has been filed by the petitioner, for grant of anticipatory bail, in case bearing FIR No.186, dated 08.10.2024, under Sections 406, 420, 120-B of IPC, registered at Police Station Civil Lines, District Patiala.

¶15

In the instant anticipatory bail petition, on 24.01.2025 following order was passed:-

¶16

“1. Present petition has been filed by the petitioner, for grant of anticipatory bail, in case bearing FIR No.186, dated 08.10.2024, under Sections 406, 420, 120-B of IPC, registered at Police Station Civil Lines, District Patiala.

¶17

2. On the very outset, as a fair stand to express his bona fide, counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner wishes to settle the dispute amicably, and is ready to pay an amount of Rs.3 lacs before the Investigating Officer to the complainant, in the shape of demand draft. However, he prays for grant of protection from his arrest.

¶18

3. In addition, counsel for the petitioner also points out that the complainant had gone to Thailand, and stayed there for a period of three months, and after returning back to India, complaint

¶19

AMANDEEP GOSAIN 2025.07.16 13:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment

¶20

CRM-M-4031-2025

¶21

- 2 -

¶22

has been made in the year 2024, i.e. after a period of about 3 years.

¶23

4. Notice of motion.

¶24

5. On advance notice, Mr. Amandeep Singh, DAG, Punjab, puts an appearance on behalf of the respondent/State.

¶25

6. List again on 01.04.2025, to enable learned State counsel to file status report in the matter.

¶26

7. Let the complainant – Jatinder Kumar, s/o Satish Kumar, r/o House No.247-A, Urban Home Kharar, District SAS Nagar, be impleaded as respondent No.2 in the present petition. Let amended memo of parties be supplied by counsel for the petitioner, before the next date.

¶27

8. In the meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to join the investigation as and when required to do so by the Investigating Agency. In the event of his arrest, the petitioner shall be released on ad-interim bail, subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall also abide by all the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023.

¶28

9. Besides, petitioner would submit/surrender his passport before the Arresting Officer and an undertaking on oath that in case of leaving the country, he would seek prior permission from the Investigating Agency/concerned Court.

¶29

¶30

10. It is clarified that the petitioner would be entitled for interim concession of anticipatory bail, only in the eventuality of making payment of Rs.3 lacs, before the Investigating Officer to the complainant, as has been stated and recorded here above. “ On 01.04.2025, following order was passed:-

¶31

1. Prayer in the present petition under Section 482 BNSS, 2023, is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.0186 dated 08.10.2024, under Sections 406, 420 and 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Civil Line Patiala, District Patiala.

¶32

2. Status report dated 31.03.2025, in the shape of affidavit of Satnam Singh, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, City-I, has been filed by learned State counsel in Court today, the same is taken on record.

¶33

AMANDEEP GOSAIN 2025.07.16 13:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment

¶34

CRM-M-4031-2025

¶35

- 3 -

¶36

Registry is directed to tag the same at appropriate place.

¶37

3. As per learned State counsel, neither the amount ordered by this Court vide order 24.01.2025 has been deposited nor the petitioner has joined the investigation.

¶38

4. Counsel for the petitioner prays for grant of one last opportunity. 5. Prayer is accepted. Petitioner is granted one last opportunity to join investigation as per the terms and conditions recorded in the order dated 24.01.2025.

¶39

6. List again on 08.05.2025.

¶40

Thereafter on 08.05.2025 and 14.07.2025 no one has appeared on behalf of the petitioner and in the interest of justice, hearing of the present petition was adjourned for today i.e. 15.07.2025.

¶41

On being asked by the Court, learned counsel for the petitioner informs that despite therebeing a conditional anticipatory bail since January 2025, not a single penny has been paid to the complainant.

¶42

In view of the above, this Court does not find any substantial reason to extend the concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶43

Accordingly, present petition is dismissed.

¶44

(SANJAY VASHISTH) 15.07.2025 JUDGE amandeep Whether speaking/reasoned. : Yes/No Whether Reportable. : Yes/No

¶45

AMANDEEP GOSAIN 2025.07.16 13:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment

Rajiv Dutta Alias Rajeev Datta v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajiv Dutta Alias Rajeev Datta v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Man Singh and Anr. Vs Mewa Rani

Makhan Singh and Others Vs State of Ut Chandigarh and Others

Tamana Sharma and Others Vs State of Punjab and Another

Neena Devi Vs State of Haryana and Others

Madan Gopal Vs Krishan Kumar

Narinderjit Goyal Vs Rajdeep Singh