CRM-M- IN 217 Sukhdeep S Vers State of Pun CORAM: Present: AARADHN 1. under Sect Station Fat petition for 2. noticed her criminal la namely, Su has a savi -45123-2025 -1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA CHANDIGA deep Singh Versus of Punjab AM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE AA Mr. Aazam Khan, Advocate fo Mr. Ritesh Pandey, Advocate f Mr. Gautam Thapar, Senior DA Mr. Harmanjeet Singh Dhaliaw Mr. Ramandeep Singh, Advoc **** ADHNA SAWHNEY, J. (Oral) Petitioner, an accused in cas r Sections 318(2), 318(3) of BNS, Fatehgarh Churian, Batala, Distric ion for grant of anticipatory bail. Relevant facts as emerging fr ed hereinbelow:- Smt. Mohinder Kaur, wife of al law in motion by filing a com , Sukhdeep Singh son of Palwinder saving bank account in Punjab N 1- PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT DIGARH CRM-M-45123-2025 Date of Decision: 06.11.2025 …Petitioner. …Respondent. CE AARADHNA SAWHNEY. cate for ocate for the petitioner. nior DAG, Punjab. haliawal, Advocate for Advocate for complainant. in case FIR No. 54 dated 20.05.202 , registered against him at Polic istrict Gurdaspur, has filed the prese ging from the documents on record b fe of Late Shir Jagtar Singh, set th complaint against her own nephew inder Singh, pointing therein that sh b National Bank Branch Fatehgar .2025 .2025, t Police present cord be et the phew, at she hgarh GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.10 11:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- Churian, b 4357 0860 personnel, presently r cheque boo for issuanc is son of re her accoun ATM card kept these also linked more than 17.12.2024 the number in the com relative, re acceding with dire officials to proceeding FIR No. 54 registered a Gurdaspur 3. of pre-arres -45123-2025 -2 n, bearing No. 0651000304187533 860 2063 9225 of the said bank. nel, she has been receiving the pen tly residing in USA. Complainant n book were misplaced and after ret uance of new ones. It is also her all of real brother of her late husband, count by playing fraud on her. W ard were delivered, Sukhdeep Singh ese valuable documents in his pos nked the ATM card by attaching it han Rs.4 lakhs from her account, 2024. She also annexed bank accou mber of mobile phone handset being complaint that initially she appr e, requested him to return the amou ng to her request, started threaten ire consequences. With this bac ls to catch hold of Sukhdeep Singh dings against him. On the basis of s 54 dated 20.05.2025, under Sect red against him at Police Station Fa spur. Apprehending his arrest, petiti arrest bail before the learned Addit 2- 533 as also an ATM card bearing N nk. Being widow of a retired Arm pension in the said account. She nt next alleged that her passbook an r returning back to India, she applie r allegation that Sukhdeep Singh, wh and, managed to get the ATM card . When these new cheque book an ingh probably received the same an possession without her consent. H ng it with UPI system and withdre nt, for the period from 3.12.2024 ccount statement and further pointe eing used by her. It is also her stan approached the accused, being h mount but the young boy rather tha atening her and her family membe backdrop, she requested the polic Singh as also to initiate appropria of said complaint, a formal case vid Sections 318(2), 318(3) of BNS, wa n Fatehgarh Churian, Batala, Distri , petitioner filed an application for gra Additional Sessions Judge, Gurdaspu ng No. Army She is k and pplied h, who ard of k and e and t. He hdrew 024 to ointed stand g her r than mbers police priate e vide S, was istrict or grant rdaspur, GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.10 11:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- which cam of the same 4. has been f enmity wit submits tha with the s agreement village Bad agreed tha unavoidabl and a dispu the son of present com had full fai her consen (petitioner) end, learne is not nee petitioner i Thus, payer 5. complainan ground that 85 years. C -45123-2025 -3 h came to be dismissed in terms of or e same, the present petition has been fi Learned counsel for the petit been falsely implicated in the presen ty with the complainant’s son. Elab its that petitioner had entered into an the son of complainant, namely, B ment, he (P) had agreed to sell land ge Baddowal Kalan, to the son of the c d that the sale deed would be ex oidable circumstances, however, the a a dispute arose between petitioner and on of the complainant was aggrieve nt complainant to lodge frivolous FIR It is further the submission of full faith and trust in petitioner and it onsent that he was operating her acc tioner) playing a fraud on the complai learned counsel also contends that cu t needed as nothing is to be reco ioner is ready and willing to join inve ayer for allowing the petition has be Per contra, learned State coun lainant have vehemently opposed the nd that petitioner deceived none else b ears. Complainant is residing abroad 3- s of order dated 05.06.2025. Aggrieve been filed. e petitioner submits that the petition present case only on account of prio . Elaborating further, learned couns to an agreement to sell dated 28.3.202 ely, Baljinder Singh. Vide the sa ll land measuring 3 kanals situated f the complainant. Both the parties ha be executed on 28.2.2024. Due r, the agreement could not be execute er and son of the complainant. Sinc grieved, he instigated his mother, i.e s FIR by misstating the facts. ion of learned counsel that the old lad and it was on her instructions and wi er account. Thus, the question of hi mplainant does not arise. Towards th hat custodial interrogation of petition e recovered from him. Nonetheles in investigation as and when called fo has been made. e counsel as also learned counsel for th sed the request for grant of bail on th else but his real aunt, lady aged abo oad and has a bank account in Punja grieved etitioner of prior counsel .3.2023 the said uated at ties had Due to xecuted Since, er, i.e., old lady nd with of him ards the etitioner etheless, lled for. l for the l on the d about Punjab GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.10 11:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- National B Officer. In the Bank w number w withdrew a even the p already sta under Secti Fatehgarh C contends th in his favou of seriousn incident w deceived, n dismissal o 6. documents 7. the counse Hon’ble Su dealing wi discussed. 8. Directorate -45123-2025 -4 nal Bank in which she receives the . In her absence, passbook, cheque ank were received by petitioner, w with the ATM and without t drew an amount of Rs.4 lakhs. Lear the past antecedents of petitioner stands convicted in a case bearin r Section 21/22 of NDPS Act, registe garh Churian. Towards the end, lea nds that petitioner has failed to make s favour, in case the relief so sought fo riousness and gravity of offence as als ent was committed behind the back ived, no leniency deserves to be g issal of the petition was made. Heard learned counsel for th ments on record. Before expressing any opinio counsels, it would be appropriate to ble Supreme Court, wherein the fa ng with an application for grant o ssed. Hon’ble the Supreme Cou orate of Enforcement, (2020) 13 SC “67. Ordinarily, arrest is investigation to secure not onl 4- s the pension being widow of a Arm cheque book as also ATM card sent b ner, who then linked his own mobi out the knowledge of complainan Learned counsel further submits th ioner are far from satisfactory, as h bearing FIR No. 51 dated 24.7.201 registered against him at Police Statio d, learned counsel for the complaina make out a case of exceptional hardsh ught for is not extended to him. In vie as also the manner in which the enti e back of the complainant, who wa be granted to petitioner. Prayer fo for the parties and have perused th opinion on submissions raised by bo iate to refer to certain judgments o the factors to be kept in mind whi rant of anticipatory bail, have bee Court in “P. Chidambaram v 3 SCC 791), has observed as under: is a part of procedure of th t only the presence of the accused b a Army sent by mobile lainant, that as he .7.2018, Station plainant ardship In view e entire ho was yer for sed the by both ents of d while e been m vs. nder:- f the ed but GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.10 11:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 9. “Ms. X Vs. 279) held a -45123-2025 -5 several other purposes. Power is an extraordinary power an sparingly. The privilege of the only in exceptional cases. T upon the court has to be prope mind as to the nature and gra of applicant fleeing justice an it is a fit case for grant anticipatory bail to some ex investigation of an offence circumspect while exercisin anticipatory bail. Anticipator matter of rule and it has to b convinced that exceptional cir extraordinary remedy.” Hon’ble the Supreme Court w Vs. The State of Maharashtra and held as under:- “11.1. We propose to take a that ought to govern grant of a of decisions of this court tha while deciding an application from undertaking a detailed a being on the prima facie issue reasonable grounds that woul committed the offence or thos 5- ower under Section 438 Cr.P.C 197 r and the same has to be exercise f the pre-arrest bail should be grante s. The judicial discretion conferre roperly exercised after application gravity of the accusation; possibili e and other factors to decide wheth ant of anticipatory bail. Grant e extent interferes in the sphere nce and hence, the court must b cising such power for grant atory bail is not to be granted as to be granted only when the court l circumstances exist to resort to th ourt while deciding the case titled a and another” (2023 SCC Online S e a quick look at the consideration t of anticipatory bail. There are a lin that have underscored the fact th tion for bail, the court ought to refra ed analysis of the evidence, the focu ssues including consideration of som would go to show if the accused ha those facts that would reflect on th 1973 rcised ranted ferred tion of ibility hether nt of ere of st be nt of as a ourt is to that titled as ne SC ations a line ct that efrain focus f some d has on the GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.10 11:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -45123-2025 -6 seriousness of the offence. The deep into the analysis of the e reasons, namely, to prevent an the prosecution or the defence and to keep all aspects of t concluded. 12. In Prasanta Kumar Sa Kumar Sarkar Vs. Ashish Ch Bench of this Court had highli borne in mind while con application and had stated tha "9. We are of the opinion tha unsustainable. It is trite that interfere with an order passe rejecting bail to the accused. upon the High Court to exe cautiously and strictly in com laid down in a plethora of dec It is well settled that, among o be borne in mind while conside (i) whether there is any prim believe that the accused had co (ii) nature and gravity of the a (iii)severity of the punishment (iv)danger of the accused abs bail; (v) character, behaviour, mea accused; (vi) likelihood of the offence be 6- . The self-imposed restraint on delvin the evidence at that stage is for val nt any prejudice to the case set up b ence likely to be taken by the accuse of the matter open till the trial r Sarkar's case (supra) (Prasan h Chatterjee and another), a Divisio ighlighted the factors that ought to b considering the anticipatory ba that :- n that the impugned order is clear that this Court does not, normall assed by the High Court granting o sed. However, it is equally incumbe exercise its discretion judiciousl compliance with the basic principl f decisions of this Court on the poin ng other circumstances, the factors nsidering an application for bail are prima facie or reasonable ground ad committed the offence; he accusation; ent in the event of conviction; absconding or fleeing, if released o means, position and standing of th ce being repeated; elving valid up by cused rial is asanta ivision t to be bail learly mally, ing or mbent iously, ciples point. tors to l are: und to sed on of the GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.10 11:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 10. The State Supreme C ought not t 11. including and again r to take int accused tam justice etc. the society which shou 12. role played para 2 of th exceptional make out a submission the compla make out a 13. documents grant of ext -45123-2025 -7 (vii) reasonable apprehension and (viii) danger, of course, of ju bail.” In Nikita Jagganath Shetty @ tate of Maharashtra and another, eme Court held that “Anticipatory ba not to be granted in a routine manne Hon’ble Supreme Court in ding Gurbaksh Singh v. State of Pun gain reiterated that while considering ke into consideration the facts like sed tampering with the evidence and e etc. Court should be circumspect a ociety as well. The anticipatory ba h should be exercised in the extraordin The factual aspects leading to played by the petitioner in the entire 2 of this order. It is settled law that t ptional remedy and is to be availed o out a case of exceptional depravity/ h issions advanced by learned State co omplainant, this Court is of the opin out a case of exceptional depravity in Consequently, in view of the ments brought on record, the Court i t of extraordinary relief of pre-arrest ba 7- sion of the witnesses being influence of justice being thwarted by grant etty @ Nikita Vishwajeet Jadhav v her, 2025 AIR SC 3375, the Hon’b ry bail is an exceptional remedy an nner.” rt in plethora of judicial preceden Punjab, AIR 1980 SC 1632, has tim dering the anticipatory bail the Court s like gravity of offence, chances o e and probabilities of his fleeing fro pect about the impact of its decision o ory bail is an extraordinary discretio aordinary circumstances. ing to the registration of the FIR and th entire incident has been highlighted that the relief of anticipatory bail is a ailed only when the accused is able vity/ hardship in his favour. In view o tate counsel as also learned counsel fo e opinion that petitioner has failed y in his favour. of the entire facts, circumstances an ourt is of the opinion that no case fo rest bail is made out. enced; ant of av vs. Hon’ble y and cedents has time Court is nces of ng from ision on scretion and the ghted in ail is an able to view of nsel for ailed to ces and case for GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.10 11:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 14. 06.11.2025 gbs -45123-2025 -8 The petition being devoid of a .2025 Whether Speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable 8- id of any merit is hereby dismissed. (AARADHNA SAWHNEY) JUDGE : Yes/No : Yes/No NEY) GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.10 11:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document