Raj Kumari vs State Of Punjab
2023 Latest Caselaw 4071 P&H

                        CRM-M-4305-2023                  -1-                2023:PHHC:051627


                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

                        233
                                                               CRM-M-4305-2023

                                                               Date of Decision: 13.04.2023

                        Raj Kumari
                                                                                   .... Petitioner


                                                  Versus

                        State of Punjab
                                                                                   .... Respondent


                        CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR VERMA


                        Present: -    Mr. Rahul Bhargava, Advocate for the petitioner.

                                      Mr. Jaspal Singh Guru, AAG, Punjab.

                        ASHOK KUMAR VERMA, J. (ORAL)

Custody certificate as well the reply dated 11.04.2023, filed

by way of affidavit of Sh. Kulwant Singh, Deputy Superintendent of

Police, Sub-Division Tanda, District Hoshiarpur on behalf of respondent-

State, are taken on record.

The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 439

of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail in case

FIR No. 173 dated 22.07.2022 registered under Sections 406, 420, 506

read with Section 34 IPC and Section 24 of the Immigration Act.

Briefly, the present FIR was registered on the complaint

No. 1445-PD dated 26.03.2022 moved by Akashdeep Singh to the Senior

Superintendent of Police, Hoshiarpur, against two persons, namely; Roop

Lal, Travel Agent and Raj Kumari (petitioner herein), alleging therein that RISHU KATARIA 2023.04.15 15:17 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CRM-M-4305-2023 -2- 2023:PHHC:051627

the petitioner in connivance with her co-accused duped the complainant

for a huge amount on the pretext of sending him abroad.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the

petitioner has falsely been implicated in the instant case. In fact, she is

also a victim at the hands of big travel agents who are settled at New Delhi.

Nothing has to be recovered from her. Learned counsel also contends that

the transactions whatsoever shown in the account of the petitioner have

wrongly been done and she has no concern with the same. Further, learned

counsel for the petitioner has placed on record copies of zimni orders

passed by the trial Court and contends that challan in the present case was

presented on 29.10.2022 and charges were framed on 03.11.2022, but till

date no prosecution witness has been examined by the trial Court, despite

the issuance of bailable warrants of the complainant and other PWs.

Petitioner is in custody since 18.10.2022. Trial is likely to take time and no

purpose will be served by keeping her in custody. Thus, it is prayed she

may be released on regular bail.

On the other land, learned State Counsel has vehemently

opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully

gone through the record.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case,

custody period of the petitioner and the fact that conclusion of trial shall

take sufficient long time, but without commenting on the merits of the

case, I am of the considered view that the petitioner deserves the

concession of regular bail.

RISHU KATARIA
2023.04.15 15:17
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment
                         CRM-M-4305-2023                 -3-                    2023:PHHC:051627


                                      Accordingly,   the      present    petition   is   allowed   and

petitioner-Raj Kumari, is ordered to be released on regular bail subject to

her furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty

Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.

                        13.04.2023                                      (ASHOK KUMAR VERMA)
                        rishu                                                  JUDGE


                                      Whether speaking/reasoned                Yes/No

                                      Whether Reportable                       Yes/No




RISHU KATARIA
2023.04.15 15:17
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment