Punjab-Haryana High Court
Khushwinder Singh Bawa And Another vs State Of Punjab on 17 May, 2013
Author: M.M.S.Bedi
Bench: M.M.S.Bedi
Cr.Misc. M 7776 of 2013 1
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB
AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
Cr.Misc. M 7776 of 2013
Date of decision:-17.5.2013
Khushwinder Singh Bawa and another
Petitioner
vs.
State of Punjab
Respondent
Present: Mr. Vikas Bahl, Advocate.
Mr. Ankur Jain,AAG, Punjab
Mr. Akashdeep Singh, Advocate.
M.M.S.BEDI,J.
The petitioners seek the concession of pre-arrest bail in a case, registered at the instance of District Manager PUNSUP alleging that the partners of firm M/S R.R. Agro Mills had been entrusted basic milling of paddy, which was to be handed over to FCI after custom milling. On physical verification, a huge shortage was detected to the tune of Rs. 7 crores.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that it was physical verification report of petitioner No.1, which disclosed misappropriation by the millers. Learned counsel has referred to the P.V. Report dated 23.2.2012 indicating that there was no shortage in the quantity of the rice or the paddy, found in the premises.
Counsel for PUNSUP has attributed misconduct to the petitioners alleging that the petitioners had not performed their duties in accordance with the procedure of law and that they had not rightly conducted the physical verification and that they had also omitted to perform their duties for a long duration. So far as the State counsel is Cr.Misc. M 7776 of 2013 2 concerned, he has, on the basis of instructions of SI Parminder Singh informed that the role of the petitioners is still under investigation and that the departmental inquiry is also pending against the petitioners.
Taking into consideration the totality of the circumstances, this court is of the opinion that the role of the petitioners or their conspiracy with the main accused is still to be established on the basis of the material, which is being gathered. At this juncture, it is debatable whether the conduct of the petitioners is a misconduct warranting departmental punishment or it is an act of conspiracy with the main accused. The petitioners are regular employees of PUNSUP. They have joined the investigation. Taking in to consideration the above circumstances, the petition is allowed and it is ordered that in case of arrest of the petitioners, they will be released on bail to the satisfaction of the arresting officer subject to the condition that the petitioners will join the investigation as and when required by the police and will not tamper with evidence or hamper the investigation. It is observed that this order will not, in any manner, prejudice the right of the prosecution agency to determine the culpability of the petitioners and present challan on the basis of illegalities or irregularities found against them.
May 17 ,2013 ( M.M.S.BEDI ) TSM JUDGE