CRM-M-61864 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND 208 Robin Singh @ Robby State of Punjab CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE Present:- MANISHA BATRA, J. 1. Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail in case bearing FIR No. registered under Sections 379B(2), 341 and 506 of IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act 2. petition are that the aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of statement got recorded by complainant Baljit Kaur alleging therein that one Gurvinder Singh @ Rinka had taken an amount of Rs. 4 Lakhs from her husband Charanjit Singh. Her husband was demanding the same back. On 15.03.2024, her husband made a telephonic call to her telling her that Gurvinder Singh had arranged a sum of Rs. 2.5 Lakhs same from his house in the evening. The complainant along with her daughter and son had gone to the house of Gurvinder Singh on her scooty to fetch the 61864-2024 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Robin Singh @ Robby Versus Punjab CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Mr. Narinder S. Lucky, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab. MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral) This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail in case bearing FIR No. registered under Sections 379B(2), 341 and 506 of IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act at Police Station City Tarn Taran, District Tarn Taran. Brief facts of the case relevant for the purpose of disposal of this petition are that the aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of statement got recorded by complainant Baljit Kaur alleging therein that one inder Singh @ Rinka had taken an amount of Rs. 4 Lakhs from her husband Charanjit Singh. Her husband was demanding the same back. On 15.03.2024, her husband made a telephonic call to her telling her that Gurvinder Singh had arranged a sum of Rs. 2.5 Lakhs same from his house in the evening. The complainant along with her daughter and son had gone to the house of Gurvinder Singh on her scooty to fetch the IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-61864-2024 (O&M) Date of decision: 29.05.2025 ...Petitioner Versus ...Respondent MANISHA BATRA Narinder S. Lucky, Advocate Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab. This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail in case bearing FIR No. 47 dated 16.03.2024, registered under Sections 379B(2), 341 and 506 of IPC and Section 25 of the n, District Tarn Taran. Brief facts of the case relevant for the purpose of disposal of this petition are that the aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of statement got recorded by complainant Baljit Kaur alleging therein that one inder Singh @ Rinka had taken an amount of Rs. 4 Lakhs from her husband Charanjit Singh. Her husband was demanding the same back. On 15.03.2024, her husband made a telephonic call to her telling her that Gurvinder Singh had arranged a sum of Rs. 2.5 Lakhs and she could take the same from his house in the evening. The complainant along with her daughter and son had gone to the house of Gurvinder Singh on her scooty to fetch the -1- 2024 (O&M) 29.05.2025 ...Petitioner ...Respondent This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 439 16.03.2024, registered under Sections 379B(2), 341 and 506 of IPC and Section 25 of the Brief facts of the case relevant for the purpose of disposal of this petition are that the aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of the statement got recorded by complainant Baljit Kaur alleging therein that one inder Singh @ Rinka had taken an amount of Rs. 4 Lakhs from her husband Charanjit Singh. Her husband was demanding the same back. On 15.03.2024, her husband made a telephonic call to her telling her that and she could take the same from his house in the evening. The complainant along with her daughter and son had gone to the house of Gurvinder Singh on her scooty to fetch the MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.05.29 19:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-61864 money. After taking money from him, they had proceeded towards their house and while on the way, they were intercepted by two persons with covered faces, who were standing along with a bike. They stopped the complainant and while pointing a pistol towards her daughter and son and showing them sharp edged weapon and extending threats to the trunk of the scooty and then escaped. On her complaint, the aforementioned FIR was registered. Investigation proceedings were initiated. On 08.06.2024, the complainant recorded a supplementary statement, on the basis of which, the petitioner was nominated as accused in this case. He was already in custody. His presence was secured. He was joined into investigation and was formally arrested in this case. On interrogation, he disclosed his complicity in the crime and also t Prince. Co 3. falsely implicated in this case on the basis of the supplementary statement of the complainant after 03 months of the incident. A false recovery has been planted upon him. He is in custody since long. Conclusion of trial would take time. His further incarceration would not serve any useful purpose. bail in other cases, which h chances of his absconding. to be allowed. 4. submitted therein and learned State counsel has levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. He is a habitual offender. 61864-2024 (O&M) money. After taking money from him, they had proceeded towards their house ile on the way, they were intercepted by two persons with covered faces, who were standing along with a bike. They stopped the complainant and while pointing a pistol towards her daughter and son and showing them sharp edged weapon and extending threats to the trunk of the scooty and then escaped. On her complaint, the aforementioned FIR was registered. Investigation proceedings were initiated. On 08.06.2024, the complainant recorded a supplementary statement, on the which, the petitioner was nominated as accused in this case. He was already in custody. His presence was secured. He was joined into investigation and was formally arrested in this case. On interrogation, he disclosed his complicity in the crime and also t Prince. Co-accused was also arrested. Investigation stands completed. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of the supplementary statement of omplainant after 03 months of the incident. A false recovery has been planted upon him. He is in custody since long. Conclusion of trial would take time. His further incarceration would not serve any useful purpose. bail in other cases, which have been registered against him. There are no chances of his absconding. Hence, it is urged to be allowed. Status report has been filed by the respondent submitted therein and learned State counsel has levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. He is a habitual offender. money. After taking money from him, they had proceeded towards their house ile on the way, they were intercepted by two persons with covered faces, who were standing along with a bike. They stopped the complainant and while pointing a pistol towards her daughter and son and showing them sharp edged weapon and extending threats to them, they took the money from the trunk of the scooty and then escaped. On her complaint, the aforementioned FIR was registered. Investigation proceedings were initiated. On 08.06.2024, the complainant recorded a supplementary statement, on the which, the petitioner was nominated as accused in this case. He was already in custody. His presence was secured. He was joined into investigation and was formally arrested in this case. On interrogation, he disclosed his complicity in the crime and also the name of the co-accused as accused was also arrested. Investigation stands completed. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of the supplementary statement of omplainant after 03 months of the incident. A false recovery has been planted upon him. He is in custody since long. Conclusion of trial would take time. His further incarceration would not serve any useful purpose. He is in on ave been registered against him. There are no urged that the present petition deserves Status report has been filed by the respondent-State. It is submitted therein and learned State counsel has argued that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. He is a habitual offender. -2- money. After taking money from him, they had proceeded towards their house ile on the way, they were intercepted by two persons with covered faces, who were standing along with a bike. They stopped the complainant and while pointing a pistol towards her daughter and son and showing them them, they took the money from the trunk of the scooty and then escaped. On her complaint, the aforementioned FIR was registered. Investigation proceedings were initiated. On 08.06.2024, the complainant recorded a supplementary statement, on the which, the petitioner was nominated as accused in this case. He was already in custody. His presence was secured. He was joined into investigation and was formally arrested in this case. On interrogation, he accused as It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of the supplementary statement of omplainant after 03 months of the incident. A false recovery has been planted upon him. He is in custody since long. Conclusion of trial would take He is in on ave been registered against him. There are no that the present petition deserves State. It is the allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. He is a habitual offender. MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.05.29 19:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-61864 There are chances of his absconding or committing similar offences, if released on bail. dismissed. 5. through the material placed on record very carefully. 6. a sum of Rs. 2.5 Lakhs from the complainant. He is 27.06.2024. Trial is likely to take time to conclude. His custodial interrogation is no more required. His involvement in two other cases cannot be considered to be a ground to deny him the concession of bail. It is well settled that bail the rule and jail is an exception. and circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served by keeping him in custody anymore. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and th regular bail, subject to his furnishing of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. 7. for the purpose of deciding the present petition and the same shall have no bearing on the merits of the case. 29.05.2025 Waseem Ansari Whethe Whether reportable 61864-2024 (O&M) There are chances of his absconding or committing similar offences, if released on bail. Therefore, it is urged that dismissed. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the material placed on record very carefully. The petitioner along with co- a sum of Rs. 2.5 Lakhs from the complainant. He is 27.06.2024. Trial is likely to take time to conclude. His custodial interrogation is no more required. His involvement in two other cases cannot be considered to be a ground to deny him the concession of bail. It is well settled that bail the rule and jail is an exception. Keeping in view the circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served by keeping him in custody anymore. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to his furnishing personal of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. It is made clear that any observation made herein above is only for the purpose of deciding the present petition and the same shall have no bearing on the merits of the case. 29.05.2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable There are chances of his absconding or committing similar offences, if it is urged that the petition is liable to be I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the material placed on record very carefully. -accused is alleged to have snatched a sum of Rs. 2.5 Lakhs from the complainant. He is in custody since 27.06.2024. Trial is likely to take time to conclude. His custodial interrogation is no more required. His involvement in two other cases cannot be considered to be a ground to deny him the concession of bail. It is well settled that bail Keeping in view the above mentioned facts circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served by keeping him in custody anymore. Accordingly, the e petitioner is ordered to be released on personal/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. It is made clear that any observation made herein above is only for the purpose of deciding the present petition and the same shall have no (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No -3- There are chances of his absconding or committing similar offences, if the petition is liable to be I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone snatched in custody since 27.06.2024. Trial is likely to take time to conclude. His custodial interrogation is no more required. His involvement in two other cases cannot be considered to be a ground to deny him the concession of bail. It is well settled that bail is above mentioned facts circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served by keeping him in custody anymore. Accordingly, the e petitioner is ordered to be released on /surety bonds to the satisfaction It is made clear that any observation made herein above is only for the purpose of deciding the present petition and the same shall have no MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.05.29 19:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document