Supreme Court Grants Anticipatory Bail in Forgery Case: Jarnail Singh vs. State of Punjab (2022)

Date of the Judgment: 07 March 2022

Citation: (2022) INSC 227

Judges: Uday Umesh Lalit, J. and S. Ravindra Bhat, J.

Can an individual be granted anticipatory bail when accused of forgery and cheating? The Supreme Court addressed this question in a recent case, focusing on whether the accused cooperated with the investigation. The Court granted anticipatory bail to the appellant, emphasizing the need for cooperation with the investigation. The judgment was delivered by a bench of Justices Uday Umesh Lalit and S. Ravindra Bhat.

Case Background

The case originates from a First Information Report (FIR) No. 271/2019, dated 18.09.2019, registered at Police Station City Kapurthala, District Kapurthala, Punjab. The FIR was lodged against the appellant, Jarnail Singh, for offences punishable under Sections 420 (cheating), 465 (forgery), 468 (forgery for purpose of cheating), 471 (using forged document as genuine), 120-B (criminal conspiracy), and 467 (forgery of valuable security, will, etc.) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

The appellant, apprehending arrest, sought anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh rejected his application, leading to the present appeal before the Supreme Court.

Timeline

Course of Proceedings

The appellant’s application for anticipatory bail was rejected by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana. Subsequently, the appellant appealed to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court, while issuing notice on 06.01.2020, granted interim relief, directing that no coercive steps be taken against the appellant.

Legal Framework

The case involves the following sections of the Indian Penal Code, 1860:

• Section 420: “Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property.” This section deals with the offense of cheating, where a person deceives another into delivering property or altering or destroying valuable security.
• Section 465: “Punishment for forgery.” This section defines forgery and prescribes the punishment for it.
• Section 468: “Forgery for purpose of cheating.” This section deals with forgery committed with the intention of cheating.
• Section 471: “Using as genuine a forged document or electronic record.” This section addresses the offense of using a forged document or electronic record as genuine.
• Section 120-B: “Punishment of criminal conspiracy.” This section deals with the offense of criminal conspiracy.
• Section 467: “Forgery of valuable security, will, etc.” This section deals with the offense of forging valuable securities, wills, etc.

The appellant sought anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which allows a person to seek bail in anticipation of an arrest.

Arguments

Arguments by the State:

• The State contended that the investigation was complete, but the appellant had not cooperated with the investigation.

Arguments by the Appellant:

• The appellant sought anticipatory bail, arguing that he was innocent and would cooperate with the investigation.

Submissions Table

Issues Framed by the Supreme Court

The primary issue before the Supreme Court was:

1. Whether the appellant should be granted anticipatory bail in light of the allegations against him, and the stage of investigation.

Treatment of the Issue by the Court

Authorities

The judgment did not explicitly cite any specific cases or books. The primary focus was on the facts of the case and the need for the appellant’s cooperation in the investigation.

Authorities Table

Judgment

How each submission made by the Parties was treated by the Court?

How each authority was viewed by the Court?

No authorities were cited in the judgment.

What weighed in the mind of the Court?

The Court’s decision was primarily influenced by the need to balance the seriousness of the allegations with the appellant’s right to personal liberty. The Court emphasized the importance of the appellant’s cooperation with the investigation. The fact that the investigation was complete and the appellant was willing to cooperate weighed in favor of granting anticipatory bail.

Fact:Law Ratio

Logical Reasoning

Judgment

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the High Court’s order. The Court directed that in case of arrest, the appellant shall be released on bail subject to:

• Furnishing a cash security of Rs. 50,000 with two like sureties.
• Extending complete cooperation in the investigation, including providing a sample signature and handwriting.
• Presenting himself before the Investigating Officer on 14.03.2022 at 11:00 a.m. and remaining present from 11:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. during the entire week.

The court observed, “Considering the entirety of the situation, in our view, the appellant is entitled to the relief of anticipatory bail.”

The Court also noted, “The appellant shall extend complete co-operation in the ensuing investigation and give a sample signature and handwriting as demanded by the Investigating Officer.”

The Court further directed, “In order to facilitate the investigation, the appellant shall present himself before the Investigating Officer on 14.03.2022 at 11.00 a.m. and shall continue to remain present from 11.00 a.m. to 5.00 p.m. during the entire week.”

There were no dissenting opinions in this case.

Key Takeaways

• Anticipatory bail can be granted even in cases of forgery and cheating if the accused is willing to cooperate with the investigation.
• Cooperation with the investigation is a key factor in granting anticipatory bail.
• Courts may impose conditions on anticipatory bail, such as requiring the accused to furnish security and appear before the investigating officer.

Directions

The Supreme Court directed the following:

• The appellant shall be released on bail upon furnishing a cash security of Rs. 50,000 with two like sureties.
• The appellant shall fully cooperate with the investigation and provide signature and handwriting samples.
• The appellant shall present himself before the Investigating Officer on 14.03.2022 at 11:00 a.m. and remain present from 11:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. for the entire week.

Development of Law

The ratio decidendi of this case is that anticipatory bail can be granted in cases of forgery and cheating if the accused is willing to cooperate with the investigation. This judgment emphasizes the importance of cooperation with the investigation as a key factor in granting anticipatory bail.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court granted anticipatory bail to the appellant, Jarnail Singh, in a case involving forgery and cheating. The Court emphasized the appellant’s cooperation with the investigation and imposed conditions to ensure his availability for the investigation. This judgment highlights the importance of balancing the seriousness of the allegations with the accused’s right to personal liberty.