CRM-M-3374-20 IN THE H SATNAM SINGH STATE OF PUNJ 1 The dat 2 The dat 3 The dat website 4 Whethe pronoun pronoun 5 The del judgme CORAM: HON Present: Mr. Mr. U Mr. R Mr. D **** MANISHA BATR 1. The 483 of Bharatiya of regular bail in under Sections 384 Offences Wing, Pu 2026 (O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH INGH DHAWAN Versus PUNJAB he date when the judgment is reserved he date when the judgment is pronoun he date when the judgment is uploaded ebsite hether only operative part of the judg ronounced or whether the full judgmen ronounced he delay, if any, of the pronouncement dgment and reasons thereof. HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANIS R.S. Bains, Senior Advocate with Mr. Utsav Singh Bains, Advocate for Mr. Roshandeep Singh, AAG, Punjab Mr. Deepak Arora, Advocate for the c **** BATRA, J. The instant petition has been filed atiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in case arising out of FIR No.11 ns 384, 420, 465, 467, 468, 120B of IP ing, Punjab Vigilance Bureau, Ludhian JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH CRM-M-3374-2026 (O&M) ... Petitioner ...Respondent served 07.05.2026 onounced 08.05.2026 loaded on the 08.05.2026 e judgment is dgment is Full cement of full Not applicable ANISHA BATRA te with ate for the petitioner Punjab r the complainant by the petitioner under Section , 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for grant 11 dated 30.11.2024 registered B of IPC at Police Station Economic udhiana. oner dent ction grant tered omic AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.08 18:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-3374-20 2. As pe Economic Wing L petitioner in conn persons, used to Transport Author against them wi officials to carry o public persons and of RTA also prod that threats were b data entry operato by the petitioner and that the accus Rs 30,000/- on as conduit in the ex petitioner. 3. After During investigati Rajiv Sood was su 4. It is a falsely implicated He is in custody s trial will take co served by detain 2026 (O&M) 2 As per the allegations, a complaint ing Ludhiana had been enquired into connivance with the co-accused Bh ed to blackmail the officials poste uthority (RTA) Ludhiana by extendin with the Vigilance Department a carry out the tasks as desired by them ns and also from the officials/officers roduced several screenshots and were being extended to them by the p perator of the office of RTA even dis to transfer an amount of Rs 80,00 accused Bhupinder Punj had come to on asking of the petitioner and that B the extortion racket, who used to c After registration of FIR, investigatio stigation, the petitioner was arrested was subsequently arrested. Investigati It is argued by learned counsel for t icated in this case. The subject offen stody since long. He is not required ke considerable time to conclude. detaining him in custody. The on plaint received at Vigilance Bureau, ed into, and it was revealed that the ed Bhupinder Punj and some other posted in the office of Regional xtending threats to lodge complaints ent and also used to coerce such them, by extorting money from the fficers of RTA. On enquiry, officials and WhatsApp messages verifying the petitioner and co-accused. One en disclosed that he was compelled 80,000/- into two different accounts ome to him and demanded a sum of that Bhupinder Punj was an active to collect money for the present stigation proceedings were initiated. rrested on 24.09.2025. Co-accused stigation now stands concluded. l for the petitioner that he has been t offences are triable by Magistrate. uired for further investigation. The ude. No useful purpose would be he only evidence against him is reau, t the other ional aints such the icials fying One elled unts of ctive sent ated. used been trate. The d be m is AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.08 18:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-3374-20 screenshots of som during trial. With of bail and the peti 5. Per co complainant and allegations against and blackmailing money from them antecedents are no if extended benefi be allowed. 6. This C for the parties at co 7. The a for commission custody since 24. incarceration of th chances of conclu proposition of law trial incarceration object of the jail is be preventive or p opinion that a cas Accordingly, the p 2026 (O&M) 3 of some WhatsApp chat. The authenti With these broad submissions, he de he petition deserves to be allowed. Per contra, learned State counsel assi t and while relying upon the status gainst the petitioner are serious in nat ailing officials/employees of RTO off them, thereby exploiting public trust are not clean. There are chances of hi benefit of bail. It is thus, urged that th This Court has heard the rival submis es at considerable length. The allegations against the petitioner sion of subject offences against him ce 24.09.2025. The investigation h n of the petitioner is not going to ser conclusion of the trial in the near futu of law is that bail is the rule and jail ration should not be replica of post jail is to secure appearance of the acc e or punitive. In view of the above d t a case is made out for grant of bail , the petition is allowed and the petiti uthenticity of the same is to be tested , he deserves to be extended benefit assisted by learned counsel for the status report has argued that the in nature. He is accused of coercing TO offices in Punjab and extracting c trust for personal enrichment. His s of his committing similar offences, that the petition does not deserve to ubmissions made by learned counsel titioner make out a prima facie case st him. However, he has been in tion has been concluded. Further to serve any fruitful purpose. The ar future are bleak. The well settled d jail is an exception. Further, pre- f post-conviction sentencing. The he accused during trial, and it cannot bove discussion, this Court is of the f bail to the petitioner at this stage. e petitioner is ordered to be released ested nefit r the t the rcing cting His nces, ve to unsel case n in rther The ttled - The nnot he tage. ased AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.08 18:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-3374-20 on bail subject t satisfaction of the concerned. 8. It is, be construed as an and shall not influ 9. Since any, is rendered in 08.05.2026 Amit Sharma 2026 (O&M) 4 ject to his furnishing personal as f the learned trial Court/Chief Judici It is, however, clarified that the obse d as an expression of opinion of this C t influence the outcome of the trial in a Since the main petition has been all ered infructuous. (MAN Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes Whether reportable:- Yes/No al as well as surety bonds to the Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate e observations made above shall not this Court on the merits of the case ial in any manner.
allowed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No the trate l not case n, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.08 18:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.