CRM-M-39576-2025 -1- 211 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-39576-2025 Date of Decision:02.08.2025 ALOK KUMAR …PETITIONER VS. STATE OF PUNJAB …RESPONDENT Coram : Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.S.Shekhawat Present : Mr. Jashandeep Singh Sandhu, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ravneet Singh Joshi, Deputy, A.G., Punjab. *** N.S.Shekhawat J. (Oral) 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 483 BNSS with a prayer to grant regular bail to him in case FIR No.10 dated 27.02.2025, registered under Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act 1988, Police Station Vigilance Bureau Jalandhar Range District Hoshiarpur, Punjab. 2. The FIR in the present case was registered on the basis of the statement made by Lovepreet Singh and the same has been reproduced below:- “Statement of Lovepreet Singh, Director, Akal Associates Private Limited (Recovery and Enforcement), Guru Gobind Singh Nagar, Gali No. 01, Shimlapuri, District Ludhiana son of Shri Paramjit Singh Cheema, resident of Mohalla Ajit Nagar, near VIPIN KUMAR 2025.08.02 14:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order CRM-M-39576-2025 -2- Hundal Dairy Farm, Village and Post Office Verka, District Amritsar, age about 31 years, Mobile No. 84374-00012, stated that I am a resident of the aforementioned address and the Director of the firm Akal Associates Private Limited (Recovery and Enforcement), Guru Gobind Singh Nagar, Gali No. 01, Shimlapuri, Ludhiana. My firm is authorized by the Regional Office of Canara Bank, Jalandhar, for recovery from defaulters of loans given by banks in the public sector. One such defaulter, Hemraj, son of Pishori Lal, resident of village and post office Aslamabad, Tehsil and District Hoshiarpur, had obtained a loan from Canara Bank, Main Branch, Hoshiarpur, and had defaulted in this loan. Under the SARFAESI Act, 2002, vide Order No. 173/Reader dated 19-01-by the Deputy Commissioner, Hoshiarpur, the Naib Tehsildar, Hoshiarpur, was appointed as Duty Magistrate for taking possession of Hemraj's property. Based on this order, the Naib Tehsildar-cum-Duty Magistrate, Hoshiarpur, via office letter No. 102/Reader-2 dated 18-02-2025, requested the Senior Superintendent police, Hoshiarpur, for police assistance at 1:00 AM on 25-02-2025. Accordingly, with police support, possession of Hemraj's property was handed over to the bank on 25-02-2025. For conducting this possession and submitting the report to the Deputy Commissioner, Hoshiarpur, Alok, Reader to Naib Tehsildar Hoshiarpur, demanded Rs.10,000 from my firm's employee, Harpreet Singh. Harpreet informed me of the demand, after which I spoke to Alok over the phone and requested him to reduce the amount as I had other possession actions pending. Alok then demanded Rs.8,000, which I recorded on my phone. I am submitting the pen drive containing the recording to you. I do not wish to pay a bribe for the work I have legally carried out. I pretended to agree to pay a bribe to Alok Reader and have approached you. I now submit Rs.8,000 before you, in 16 notes of Rs.500 each. Legal action should be taken against Alok, Reader to Naib Tehsildar Hoshiarpur. I have scribed VIPIN KUMAR 2025.08.02 14:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order CRM-M-39576-2025 -3- this statement, it has been read to me and found correct.SD/ Lovepreet Singh.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner had never accepted any bribe from the complainant and he has been falsely involved in the present case. The petitioner was arrested in the present case on 27.02.2025 and is in custody for the last more than 05 months. After completion of investigation, the challan has already been presented against him. He further contends that the prosecution has placed reliance on 28 witnesses, but even charge has not been framed against the petitioner. Thus, the conclusion of the trial may take quite a long time. Further, the petitioner is a first offender and is not in a position to influence the witnesses of the prosecution. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that serious allegations have been levelled against the present petitioner and he does not deserve the concession of bail by this Court. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully. 6. In the present case, the petitioner was arrested on 27.02.2025 and is in continuing in custody for the last more than 05 months. The police had completed the investigation against the petitioner and challan has been presented on 24.04.2025. Still further, the petitioner is a public servant and there are no chances of fleeing from the process of justice. Thus, the further custody of the petitioner will not serve any useful purpose. 7. Without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his VIPIN KUMAR 2025.08.02 14:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order CRM-M-39576-2025 -4- furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate, concerned. 02.08.2025 (N.S. SHEKHAWAT) vipin JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No VIPIN KUMAR 2025.08.02 14:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order