High CourtsSingle Bench

Bikramjit Singh vs State Of Punjab

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 4 January 2021 · Citation: (2021) 01 P&H CK 0009

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anupinder Singh Grewal, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 120B, 420
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Petition (M) No. 30074 Of 2020 (O & M)
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

19 paragraphs · 362 words

Anupinder Singh Grewal, J

Heard through video conferencing.

The petitioner is seeking regular bail in FIR No.57 dated 04.05.2019, under Sections 420 and 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Sultanwind,

District Amritsar.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that it is alleged that the petitioner had duped the complainant into entering into an agreement to sell dated

27.05.2016. He, however, contends that in the agreement to sell, the complainant had agreed to sell his 03 kanals and 10 marlas of his land for Rs. 22

lacs for which the complainant had allegedly received Rs. 15 lacs in cash and the outstanding amount of Rs. 7 lacs was to be paid by 29.08.2016 at

the time of execution of the agreement to sell. The agreement was not executed and the petitioner filed a civil suit for specific performance wherein

the trial Court had directed the parties to maintain status quo. He also contends that the possession of the land is still with the complainant and there is

a delay of 03 years in filing the FIR. The petitioner is in custody for over 04 months.

Learned State counsel states that as per the custody certificate, the petitioner is in custody for 04 months and 06 days. He upon instructions from ASI

Gurwail Singh states that although the challan has been filed but no prosecution witness has been examined.

Learned counsel for the complainant submits that allegations against the petitioner are serious and he is also involved in several other cases.

Heard through video conferencing.

In view of the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, especially when the civil suit between the parties is pending, the possession of the land

is with the complainant, the petitioner is in custody for over 04 months, Covid 19 pandemic and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I

deem it a fit case to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner.

Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on

his furnishing requisite bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.