Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 31495 (PNJ)

NEHA AKA NEHA TIWARI v. STATE OF PUNJAB

CRM-M/13102/2025 · 2025-07-07

Manjari Nehru Kaul

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRM-M No.13102 of 2025 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 224 CRM-M No.13102 of 2025 Date of decision: 07.07.2025 Neha Aka Neha Tiwari ....Petitioner V/s State of Punjab ....Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL Present: Mr. Anil Kumar , Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Rana, Senior DAG, Punjab assisted by SI Amarjeet Singh. ***** MANJARI NEHRU KAUL , J. (ORAL) 1. The petitioner is seeking the concession of anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) read with Section 438 Cr.P.C in case FIR No.170 dated 19.12.2024 under Sections 420, 120-B IPC and Section 13 of Punjab Travel Professionals (Regulations) Act, 2014, registered at Police Station Division No.8, Police Commissionerate, Ludhiana. 2. Status report by way of an affidavit of Mohit Kumar Aggarwal, PPS, Superintendent of Police, Sub Division Mullanpur, District SAS Nagar (Mohali) on behalf of respondent No.1-State has been filed. The same is taken on record. 3. On the last date of hearing on 10.03.2025, while noticing the following submissions made by the learned counsel for the ARCHANA ARORA 2025.07.09 09:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.13102 of 2025 2 petitioner, this Court had granted the concession of interim bail to the petitioner and asked him to join investigation:- “ Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that a bare perusal of the contents of the FIR reveals that not even a single penny has been transacted through the bank in the name of the petitioner, who was merely an employee in the travel agency being run by co-accused, Sachin.” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of order dated 10.03.2025, the petitioner has joined investigation and cooperated with the investigating agency. 5. Learned State counsel does not dispute the factum of the petitioner having joined investigation and cooperated with the investigating agency. He, on further instructions, submits that the petitioner is not required for further investigation much less for her custodial interrogation. 6. In view of the above, the petition is allowed and interim order dated 10.03.2025, is made absolute subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C./482(2) of BNSS, 2023. (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) July 07,2025 JUDGE archana Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No ARCHANA ARORA 2025.07.09 09:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document