CRM-M-5120-2024 -1- 238 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-5120-2024 Date of decision: 11.03.2025 NARINDER SINGH ...PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB ...RESPONDENT CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present: Mr.Balbir Kumar Saini, Advocate for the peoner. Mr. Adesh Pal Singh, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Vikas Bali, Advocate for the complainant. **** ANOOP CHITKARA, J. (ORAL) FIR No. Dated Police Staon Secons 194 13.09.2023 Samrala, District Khanna 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of IPC, 1860 and Secon 13 of Punjab Prevenon of Human Smuggling Act, 2012 1. The peoner incarcerated in the FIR caponed above had come up before this Court under Secon 439 of Cr.P.C, seeking regular bail. 2. Per paragraph 8 of the reply, the accused has the following criminal antecedents: Sr. No. FIR No. Date Offenses Police Staon 1. 148 10.06.2022 420/120-B IPC and Secon 24 of Immigraon Act Jamalpur 2. 259 24.11.2022 420/120-B IPC and Secon 13 of Punjab Travels Federaon Regulaon Act, 2014 City Moga 3. Peoner was released on interim bail vide order dated 12.03.2024 which is connuing the date. 4. The facts and allegaons are being taken from the reply filed by the State, which reads as follows: 3. That the brief facts of the case are that the complainant Rajinder Kumar moved applicaon no.68758-PGD dated 04-11-2022 before the Senior Superintendent of Police, Khanna against (1) Avtar Singh (2) peoner Narinder Singh @ Ninder Singh (3) Sidhu partners M/s Guru Renu Bala 2025.03.19 15:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-5120-2024 -2- Nanak Training and trade Centre, Kotakpura Byepass, Ghorewala Road, Moga (4) Satnam Singh for hatching a criminal conspiracy, embezzling huge amount in the name of sending him abroad, for preparing false and forged visa, and for extending life threats. It is respecCully submiDed that the detailed contents of applicaon have not been reproduced here as the same are in FIR (Annexure P-1). OVT 4- That the inquiry regarding the applicaons was marked to the then DSP, Khanna. During the inquiry, the facts came to light that: (i) On 15.12.2021, abovesaid Satnam Singh contacted the complainant and assured him that Satnam Singh will seDle the complainant in Portugal. AFer that, Satnam Singh introduced the complainant to the peoner Narinder Singh and Avtar Singh, who demanded Rs.4,50,000/- from the complainant in lieu of arranging his visa and at that me, Sohanjit Singh was also present there. (ii) Subsequently, the said accused persons took documents and Rs.5500/- each from the complainant and Sohanjit Singh. AFer that, the complainant transferred Rs.7,00,000/- whereas Sohanjit Singh transferred Rs.2,00,000/- in the bank account of Guru Nanak Trading and Trade Center. (iii) Despite taking Rs.9,00,000/- in total from the complainant and Sohanjit Singh, the aforesaid accused persons provided fake visas to them. The accused neither sent the complainant or Sohanjit Singh to Portugal nor returned their money back. (iv) On demand by the complainant party, they gave a cheque amounng to Rs.9,00,000/-, but the same was dishonoured when presented before the banker. In this manner, the said accused persons have defrauded the complainant and Sohanjit Singh on the pretext of sending them to Portugal and misappropriated the enre amount. (v) It was recommended in the inquiry report that the peoner along with co-accused commiDed cheang with the complainant and Sohanjit Singh to the tune of Rs.9,00,000/-. Therefore, it was recommended in the inquiry report to register FIR U/s 406, 420, 467, 120-B IPC against Satnam Singh, the peoner Narinder Singh @ Ninder and Avtar Singh. However, it was recommended to take legal opinion of District ADorney. 5. The peoner's counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent condions and contends that further pre-trial incarceraon would cause an irreversible injusce to the peoner and their family. He submits that maDer stands seDled qua the money and which Renu Bala 2025.03.19 15:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-5120-2024 -3- remain is the passport of complainant which is not with him and peoner undertakes to make a statement before the Passport Officer, in case, he also furnishes all affidavits as required to do so within 15 days from today. He further submits that whatever templates on which the affidavits of the peoner are required, be supplied to complainant through counsel and undertakes to send it directly or through counsel. 6. Counsel for the State as well as the complainant submit that the maDer has been seDled except for the reason that passport is to be returned. However, counsel for the peoner submits that for the purpose of expenditure to be incurred for re-issuance of passport, he has paid an amount of Rs.20,000/- for the reasons that passport was not destroyed but got accidentally missed. 7. It would be appropriate to refer to the following porons of the reply, which read as follows: That the peoner Narinder Singh, in connivance with the co- accused, commiDed cheang and forgery by assuring the complainant and another individual, Sohanjit Singh, that they would be sent to Portugal. The peoner, along with the other accused, the took a substanal amount of money from the vicms NOTARY * pretense of arranging visas. However, the visas provided were tak ovided were fake their OF INDIA and the peoner, along with his associates, failed to fulfill t promises or refund the amount received. The fraudulent acvies involved not only the creaon of forged documents but also the issuance of a cheque for Rs. 9,00,000/- as a refund, which was dishonored upon presentaon. These acons constute offences under Secons 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, and 120-B IPC, as well as Secon 13 of the Punjab Prevenon of Human Smuggling Act, 2012. The gravity of these offences is further compounded by the fact that the peoner is also implicated in two other FIRs of a similar nature, indicang a paDern of criminal behaviour. REASONING: 8. Since, the maDer stand seDled between the pares, no reasons to deny bail is made out. There is sufficient primafacie evidence connecng the peoner with the alleged crime. However, pre-trial incarceraon should not be a replica of post-convicon sentencing. Per the custody cerficate dated 01.08.2024, the peoner’s complete total custody in this FIR is 05 months and 12 days ll the date of his release. Given the penal provisions invoked viz-a-viz pre-trial custody, coupled with the primafacie analysis of the nature of allegaons, and the other factors peculiar to this case, there would be no jusfiability to disconnue the interim bail. Renu Bala 2025.03.19 15:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-5120-2024 -4- 9. Without commenng on the case's merits, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and for the reasons menoned above, the peoner makes a case for bail. 10. Given above, peon is allowed and order dated 12.03.2024 is made absolute. All pending applicaons, if any, stand disposed of. 11.03.2025 ( ANOOP CHITKARA) renubala JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No Renu Bala 2025.03.19 15:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document