IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 217 CRM-M-12812-2025 Date of decision: April 01, 2025 SUNHERA SINGH @ SUNHER SINGH ...Petitioner Versus STATE OF PUNJAB ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL Present: Mr. Ankit Kundu, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Rana, Sr. DAG, Punjab with Inspector Gagandeep Kaur, Vigilance Bureau, Mohali. MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL) 1. The instant petition has been filed under section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.03 dated 17.01.2023 (Annexure P-1) under Sections 409, 420, 120-B IPC and Section 13(1)(a) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, registered at Police Station Vigilance Bureau FS-1, District Mohali. 2. On the last date of hearing i.e. 19.03.2025, learned Stated counsel was directed to verify the authenticity of the certificate (Annexure P-1). 3. Learned State counsel, on instructions, submits that the petitioner was no doubt admitted in hospital on 02.03.2025, however, he had thereafter been discharged on 11.03.2025 in a stable condition. On further instructions, it has been submitted that despite repeated notices being sent to the petitioner to appear before the Investigating Agency, he has been evading service and his whereabouts are unknown. In addition, learned State counsel Jaspreet Kaur 2025.04.03 13:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-12812-2025 -2- has drawn the attention of this Court to the serious and specific allegations levelled against the petitioner in the FIR in question (annexed as Annexure P-1 with the main petition) and has submitted that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required in the present case as it would help in unraveling as to who all including some public servants may have conspired in the commission of the offences. Learned State counsel, on further instructions, has submitted that since the petitioner has been evading service, arrest warrants have now been issued against him. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant material on record. 6. Allegedly, the petitioner was allotted a plot in IT City, SAS Nagar, vide EO GMADA Intent Letter No.51699 dated 15.11.2016. On 29.05.2017, he entered into an agreement to sell the Letter of Intent (LOI) for the plot to the complainant and received an advance payment of Rs.10 lacs. As per Clause 3 of the agreement, the balance amount was to be paid at the time of finalizing the transaction, with the last date for completion fixed as 04.07.2017. The deal was facilitated by Sahni Properties of SAS Nagar. 7. However, as per allegations, the petitioner later reneged on his commitment and sold the LOI to Dr. Parminderjit Singh, through a separate agreement to sell. Upon learning of this, the complainant submitted an application to GMADA authorities, requesting that the LOI not be transferred to Dr. Parminderjit Singh due to the pre-existing agreement in his favour. Despite this objection, the Estate Officer transferred the LOI to Dr. Parminderjit Singh vide transfer letter dated 12.03.2018. Jaspreet Kaur 2025.04.03 13:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-12812-2025 -3- 8. During investigation, it came to light that the petitioner had conspired with certain officials of GMADA and had also destroyed the plot file of the complainant. 9. In view of the specific and serious allegations against the accused including the petitioner, no ground is made out to extend the extraordinary concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 10. Accordingly, the instant petition stands dismissed. 11. However, it is made clear that anything observed hereinabove shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. April 01, 2025 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Jaspreet Kaur JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No Jaspreet Kaur 2025.04.03 13:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh