Punjab-Haryana High Court
Surinder Singh vs State Of Punjab on 23 January, 2018
Author: Tejinder Singh Dhindsa
Bench: Tejinder Singh Dhindsa
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-40344-2017 (O&M)
Date of decision:23.01.2018
Surinder Singh ... Petitioner
Vs.
State of Punjab ... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA.
Present: Ms. Isha Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Sidakmeet Singh Sandhu, AAG, Punjab.
...
TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA, J. (ORAL).
This order shall dispose of the instant petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.70, dated 09.10.2017, under Sections 7 and 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 read with Section 342 IPC, registered at Police Station Mehta, Amritsar.
Briefly noticed, allegations against the present petitioner, who is serving as Sub Inspector in Punjab Police as also another co-accused are that one Amarbir Singh was unlawfully detained and a total sum of Rs.56 lakhs approximately was extracted for him while such Amarbir Singh was under the scammer for taking Rs.4 lakhs each from prospective candidates and to be recruited in the Army.
On 15.11.2017, the following order was passed by this Court:
"List again on 04.12.2017.
In the event of arrest, petitioner shall be released on ad interim anticipatory bail in FIR No.70 dated 09.10.2017, registered under Sections 7 and 13 of Prevention of Corruption 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 26-01-2018 06:08:03 ::: CRM-M-40344-2017 (O&M) -2- Act, 1988 read with Section 342 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, at Police Station Mehta, Amritsar, on furnishing of his bail bonds amounting to `10,000/- with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer, till the next date of hearing. Petitioner is directed to join the investigation as and when required and fully cooperate with the Investigating/Arresting Officer. Petitioner shall abide by the conditions envisaged under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
State is directed to file reply within 2 weeks."
Learned State counsel upon instructions from ASI Balkar Singh apprises the Court that the petitioner has since joined investigation.
That apart, it has gone uncontroverted that till date no FIR has been registered separately against Amarbir Singh against the allegations of him having duped people on the pretext of getting them job. This is inspite of the fact that as per prosecution, 35 certificates pertaining to educational qualifications of different persons had been recovered from the residential premises of Amarbir Singh.
Without making any observations on merits and keeping in view the fact that the petitioner has joined investigation, prayer is accepted.
Petition is allowed. Order dated 15.11.2017 passed by this Court is made absolute.
Disposed of.
23.01.2018 (TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA)
harjeet JUDGE
i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No
ii) Whether reportable? Yes/No
2 of 2
::: Downloaded on - 26-01-2018 06:08:04 :::