NDPS | Mentioning FIR Number On Memos Before Registration Makes the Entire Recovery Suspect: Himachal Pradesh High Court MACT | Once Deceased Is Proven To Be Skilled Worker, Deputy Commissioner's Wage Notification Is Applicable: P&H HC Bank’s Technical Excuses Can’t Override Employee’s Right to Ex Gratia Under Old Circulars: Bombay High Court Slams Canara Bank’s Rejection of Claim Once Worker Files Affidavit of Unemployment, Burden Shifts to Employer to Prove Gainful Employment: Delhi High Court Grants 17B Relief Despite 12-Year Delay Specific Relief Act | Readiness and Willingness Must Be Real and Continuous — Plaintiffs Cannot Withhold Funds and Blame the Seller: Bombay High Court Even If Claim Is Styled Under Section 163A, It Can Be Treated Under Section 166 If Negligence Is Pleaded And Higher Compensation Is Claimed: Supreme Court When Cheating Flows from One Criminal Conspiracy, the Law Does Not Demand 1852 FIRs: Supreme Court Upholds Single FIR in Multi-Crore Cheating Case Initiating Multiple FIRs on Same Facts is Impermissible: Supreme Court Quashes Parallel FIRs and Grants Bail Protection in Refund Case Limitation Act | Quasi-Judicial Bodies Cannot Invoke Section 5 Principles Without Express Statutory Grant: Supreme Court Arbitration Act | Commencement of Proceedings Triggered by Notice Receipt, Not Section 11 Filing: Supreme Court Strong and Cogent Evidence Must Exist at the Threshold to Deny Bail Under Section 319 CrPC: Supreme Court Appellate Court Under Section 37 Cannot Sit in Appeal Over Arbitral Award on Merits: Supreme Court Affidavit Ratifying Power of Attorney Cannot Be Disowned Later: Supreme Court Orders Specific Performance Despite Earlier Revocation Claims No Law Empowers a Corporation to Haunt a Retiree: Supreme Court Quashes Post-Retirement Disciplinary Action for Want of Jurisdiction Mere Expectation of Higher Bids Can't Justify Cancelling a Valid Auction: Supreme Court Quashes GDA’s Arbitrary Rejection of Highest Bidder Prolonged Incarceration Without Trial Violates Article 21, Even in Grave Economic Offences: Supreme Court Grants Bail to Arvind Dham in ₹673 Crore PMLA Case Article 14 | ‘Rules of the Game Cannot Be Changed Midstream’: Supreme Court Quashes Punjab’s Modified Sports Quota Policy for MBBS Admissions Rules of the Game Cannot Be Changed Midway: Supreme Court Quashes Bihar’s Retrospective Recruitment Amendment "Imaginary Ghost" - Court Permits Karthigai Deepam at Thiruparankundram ‘Deepathoon’: Madras High Court 353 IPC | Continuing Prosecution Against Citizens Despite Statutory Findings of Police Atrocities Is Abuse of Process: Kerala High Court Court Cannot Compel Plaintiff to Continue Suit Where No Liberty to File Fresh Suit is Sought: Bombay High Court Claim for Demurrage is Not a Crystallized Debt—Only an Unadjudicated Right to Sue: Andhra Pradesh High Court Declared Foreign Nationals Have No Right to Reside in India: Gauhati High Court Upholds Expulsion of Bangladeshi Woman Without Requiring Deportation Protocols At the Stage of Framing Charge, Presumption Suffices; Suicide Note and Grave Suspicion Enough: Allahabad High Court Refuses to Quash Charge Under Section 306 IPC 173 CrPC | Framing of Charge Marks End of Investigation—Complainant Cannot Reopen Probe Merely by Citing Police Lapses: Bombay High Court “Possession Follows Title” Not An Absolute Rule When Ownership Is Disputed: Andhra Pradesh High Court ORDER 30 CPC | Appeal Filed by Firm Does Not Abate on Death of Partners: Calcutta High Court Bank Cannot Freeze Customer’s Account Based on Third-Party Dispute: Calcutta High Court Slams Axis Bank

Denial of Bail Must be Exception in Economic Offences: High Court Grants Bail in PACL Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court today granted regular bail to Damanjot Singh, the petitioner involved in the PACL Limited forgery case. The judgement was pronounced by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi, who underscored the principle that “denial of bail must be the exception rather than the rule” in cases of economic offences, echoing his views in the landmark Maninder Sharma case.

The case, registered under various sections of the IPC, including Sections 384, 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, and 120-B, revolves around allegations of criminal conspiracy and forgery in the affairs of PACL Limited. The petitioner was accused of facilitating a fictitious meeting and fraudulently appointing directors to the company.

Justice Bedi, in his decision, highlighted the considerations for bail in economic offences, especially when the trial is likely to be prolonged and the accused has been in custody without examination of any of the 46 prosecution witnesses. The court also took into account that the allegations against Singh were primarily based on his relationship with his in-laws, who are central figures in the case.

Represented by Mr. R.S. Rai, Senior Advocate, along with Ms. Eknoor Kaur Sara and Mr. Nimish Chib, Advocate, the petitioner’s plea for bail was contested by Ms. Ramta K Chaudhary, DAG, Punjab, and Mr. A.P.S. Deol, Senior Advocate, representing the complainant.

In a detailed judgement, Justice Bedi also discussed the jurisdictional aspects and the role of the Serious Fraud Investigating Office (SFIO) in the context of alleged violations of the Companies Act, 2013.

The court imposed specific conditions for bail, including monthly appearances before the police station concerned and an affidavit submission stating non-involvement in any other case/crime. Additionally, the petitioner is required to deposit a Fixed Deposit Receipt (FDR) of Rs. 5,00,000 as a security measure.

Date of Decision: 30 November  2023

Damanjot Singh  VS The State of Punjab

Latest Legal News