CRM-M-40546-2024 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 221 (2nd case) CRM-M-40546-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 30.04.2025 Sarbjit Kaur@ Sarabjit Kaur .....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU Present: Mr. Vikas Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S.S.Chahal, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Varun Goyal, Advocate for the complainant. **** MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU , J. Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of bail pending trial to the petitioner in FIR No.137 dated 21.11.2023, registered under Sections 448, 420, 465, 468, 471 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘IPC’) (Sections 201 and 467 IPC added later on), at Police Station City Nakodar, District Jalandhar Rural. 2. Allegations are that petitioner along with other co-accused in criminal conspiracy with each other forcibly took possession of house from Piara Singh and also cheated complainant party by forging documents qua said house. 3. Contends that is in custody since 21.03.2024; final report under Section 173 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has already been Rajeev Purohit 2025.05.01 10:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-40546-2024 2 presented on 05.05.2024; charges were framed on 03.10.2024; but out of total 32 prosecution witnesses, none has been examined till date. Lastly contended that conclusion of trial will take sufficient long time; thus, further incarceration of the petitioner would not serve any purpose. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed the prayer while submitting that allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature; hence, she does not deserve the concession of bail pending trial. 5. Heard and perused the paper-book. 6. Concededly, petitioner is in custody since 21.03.2024; final report under Section 173 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has already been presented on 05.05.2024; charges were framed on 03.10.2024; but out of total 32 prosecution witnesses, none has been examined till date. As the conclusion of trial may take sufficient long time; therefore, further incarceration of the petitioner would not serve any purpose. 7. Consequently, present petition is allowed; petitioner shall be admitted to bail on furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned. 8. Petitioner shall appear on each & every date of hearing and to fully co-operate with the learned trial Court without seeking any unnecessary adjournment(s). 9. The above observations be not construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 10. It is clarified that in case there is recurrence or any misuse of concession of bail on the part of the petitioner, State would be at liberty to move an appropriate application for recalling of this order. Rajeev Purohit 2025.05.01 10:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-40546-2024 3 Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off. 30.04.2025 (MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU) Rajeev (rvs) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No Rajeev Purohit 2025.05.01 10:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document