BEFORE THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND
HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Crl M.A No …………….. 2019
FIR NO. 0121/2018
U/s: 420, 465, 468, 471, 120-
B IPC, U/S 13 OF The Travel
Professional Regulation ACT 2014
P.S.: Division No 1, JALANDHAR
IN RE:
IN THE MATTER OF:
AMANDEEP APPLICANT
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB RESPONDENT
INDEX
Sr. No. Particular Page No.
1. Notice of motion
2. Urgent Application
3. Application under section 438 CrPC for
Anticipatory bail along with affidavit
4. Annexure –-A1
True Copy of the Impugned order passed by the ld District
and session Judge, Jalandhar
5. Annexure –A-2
True Copy of the Suicide Note of Main Accused Gagan
Nawel Sharma
6. Annexure –A-3
True Copy of the Documents regarding
transfer of body of the main accused
Gagan Nawel Sharma
7. Annexure –A-4
True Copy of the Legal Notice Dated 10.03.2017
8. Annexure –A-5
True Copy of the Passbook of the applicant
9. Vakalatnama
FILED BY: -
Surinder Kaur & Associates
Advocates
Off: 533, Rohini Courts
Chambers Block,
New Delhi -110085
email :
[email protected],
[email protected] M: 9654531517, 9999601636;
Enrolment no. D-747/ 89, D 2992/14
BEFORE THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Crl M.A No …………….. 2019
FIR NO. 0121/2018
U/s: 420, 465, 468, 471, 120-
B IPC, U/S 13 OF The Travel
Professional Regulation ACT 2014
P.S.: Division No 1, JALANDHAR
IN RE:
IN THE MATTER OF:
AMANDEEP APPLICANT
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB RESPONDENT
URGENT APPLICATION
To,
THE HON’BLE REGISTRAR,
HIGH COURT PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Sir,
The applicant is filing the accompanying application under section
438 Cr.P.C.
In view of the grounds mentioned in the accompanying application
and the fact that the abovementioned applicants apprehend arrest so
the hearing of the application is urgently required.
It is prayed accordingly.
Surinder Kaur & Associates
Advocates
Off: 533,Rohini Courts
Chambers block,
New Delhi -110085
email : [email protected]
M: 9654531517, 9999601636;
Enrolment no. D-747/ 89
DATED:
NEW DELHI ADVOCATE OF APPLICANT
BEFORE THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Crl M.A No …………….. 2019
FIR NO. 0121/2018
U/s: 420, 465, 468, 471, 120-
B IPC, U/S 13 OF The Travel
Professional Regulation ACT 2014
P.S.: Division No 1, JALANDHAR
IN RE:
IN THE MATTER OF:
AMANDEEP APPLICANT
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB RESPONDENT
NOTICE OF MOTION
To,
Sir / Madam,
Please take notice that the accompanying application filed on
behalf of the applicant will be taken up for hearing on ________
or on any other day as per the convenience and pleasure of the
Hon’ble Court.
DATED:
THROUGH
Surinder Kaur & Associates
(Advocates)
Off: 533,Rohini Courts, Chambers block,
New Delhi -110085
email :
[email protected] M: 9654531517, 9999601636; Enrolment no. D-747/ 89
BEFORE THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Crl M.A No …………….. 2019
FIR NO. 0121/2018
U/s: 420, 465, 468, 471, 120-
B IPC, U/S 13 OF The Travel
Professional Regulation ACT 2014
P.S.: Division No 1, JALANDHAR
IN RE:
IN THE MATTER OF:
AMANDEEP SINGH AND ANR APPLICANT
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB RESPONDENT
APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 438 OF CODE OF
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE FOR GRANT OF
ANTICIPATORY BAIL ON BEHALF OF ABOVE
MENTIONED ACCUSED/APPLICANTS.
Sir,
The, above named, most respectfully submits as under:
BRIEF FACTS
1. That the main accused i:e Gagan Nawel Sharma (now deceased)
was elder nephew of the complainant Ravi Sharda and both met
at a family wedding at 13.11.2015, where allegedly Gagan Nawel
Sharma introduced himself as Marketing Director in Samsung
India and that his company was hiring for immigration to Canada
where he first gets work visa and thereafter permanent residence
of Canada and the complainant on the asking of Gagan had
invested money for the same purpose but the purpose for which
the money was given allegedly was not fulfilled so he filed the
complaint which later on was converted into the FIR.
2. That the applicant in the present application had moved an
application under section 438 Crpc before the District and
Session Judge at Jalandhar Court, which was dismissed vide
order (Impugned Order) dated 18.02.2019 (which is being
annexed as (ANNEXURE A1). Hence the present application.
3. That in the impugned order the Ld District and Session Judge has
only mentioned the submissions of the counsel of the applicants
but had not appreciated the same and has dismissed this
application by mentioning the contents of recovery of Rs 12, 00,
000 (Twelve Lakh only) and had not completely gone through the
contents of the FIR minutely and word by word which itself
shows the false implication of the accused in the present case and
the entire contents of the FIR doesn’t attract the
provision/ingredients of the sections mentioned in the FIR.
4. That the applicant is neither previous convict nor habitual
offender and has never involved himself in any criminal
activities.
GROUNDS :
1. That the applicant is a peace-loving and law-abiding citizen of
India having clean antecedents.
2. That the complainants are relatives of the applicant i:e and
maternal uncle-in- law (mama sasur) of the applicant no and
accused Gagan Sharma now deceased is real brother in law
(sala) of the applicant.
3. That it is pertinent to mention here that the main accused i:e
Gagan nawal Sharma now deceased had committed suicide by
self hanging on 21.03.2017 at Antananarivo, Madagascar,
South Africa, which was committed by the deceased due to
the mental torture and harassment by the complainants which
the deceased Gagan Nawel Sharma has specifically mentioned
in the suicide note in his own handwriting which has been
annexed as Annexure- A2 and documents of handing over the
dead body are also annexed as Annexure –A3 given by the
Govt of South Africa. The information regarding the
commission of offence if any was given on 10.07.2018 to the
concerned Police Commissioner, Jalandhar i:e almost 1 year
and 5 months after the death of the main accused with whom
the complainants were dealing and the present FIR got
registered in order to extort money from the remaining family
members of the deceased by putting social pressure and
hampering the social reputation of the family member of the
main accused i:e deceased Gagan Nawal Sharma although the
contents of the FIR itself shows that the demand of money and
misrepresentation is only by the deceased Gagan Nawal
Sharma.
4. That as per the aforesaid FIR, the applicant has not committed
any crime neither he has committed any conspiracy nor had
any role regarding the demand of money and acceptance of
money from any of the complainant.
5. That it is pertinent to mention here that the complainant had
sent a legal notice dated 10.03.2017 through his lawyer Shri
R.R. Neeraj to deceased Gagan Nawel Sharma, wherein he has
specifically mentioned an amount of Rs 12, 00, 000 (Twelve
Lakh only) was demanded by deceased Gagan Nawel Sharma
and he had also issued a cheque in favour of the complainant
in order to discharge his liability, which got disowned by the
bank of the deceased Gagan, hence this notice was issued to
him, the copy of the same is annexed herewith as
ANNEXURE- A4. That the contents of this notice clearly
indicates taking/ transaction of money between the
complainant and deceased Gagan but later on after death of
Gagan the complainant had included the name of the applicant
in order to extort money from them .
6. That no demand and transaction of money was done on
behalf of the applicant (the copy of the passbook of the only
account of the applicants has been annexed as (ANNEXURE
A5) who had nothing to do with the alleged incidents and
commission of offence in the FIR. It is pertinent to mention
here that the name of the applicant Amandeep has not been
mentioned either in complaint or in FIR, by alleging anything
against him, but only in the array of accused persons.
7. That the applicant since the knowledge of the present
FIR are living under constant fear and tension of arrest hence
the present application.
8. That the applicants/accused have apprehension of arrest
in the hands of police official of the concerned P.S.
9. That there are no chances of tampering with the
witnesses and applicant is ready to join the investigation as
and when directed by the S.H.O/I.O and the Hon’ble Court.
10. That there is no requirement of custodial investigation
in the present case of the applicants/accused.
11. That it is a settled proposition of law that bail is rule and
its denial is an exception.
12. That there is no apprehension of the absconding or
tempering with the evidence or threat to witnesses.
13. That the judicial custody is not punitive in nature but
preventive and must be opted only when the charges are
serious.
14. That the refusal of bail is not for punitive purpose but for
the bi-focal interest of justice – to the individuals involved and
society affected.
15. That the applicant has no criminal antecedents.
16. That the applicant/accused further undertakes to produce
the sound surety to satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court.
17. That the applicant undertakes to abide all the conditions as
this Hon’ble Court deem fit to impose upon him at the time of
granting bail.
PRAYER:
In view of the submissions made above, it is most respectfully
prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to direct the IO/SHO
to release applicant/accused on anticipatory bail, in the event of their
arrest, in the interest of justice..
DATED
APPLICANT
THROUGH
Surinder Kaur & Associates
(Advocates)
Off: 533,Rohini Courts
Chambers block,
New Delhi -110085
email :
[email protected] M: 9654531517, 9999601636;
Enrolment no. D-747/ 89
