Allowed

Varinder Singh v. Ut of J and K Th Senior Suprintendent of Police Anti Corruption Bureau Jammu

J&K HC2 Dec 2022Bail App/396/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Deputy Superintendent of Police arrested in a corruption trap case under the Prevention of Corruption Act sought bail. High Court rejected Special Judge's denial, citing trap failure and short investigation duration, granting bail with strict conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted bail subject to furnishing personal and surety bonds of Rs. 1 lac each to the Investigating Officer.

Varinder Singh Vs Ut of J and K Th Senior… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | J&K HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU

¶3

Bail App No. 396/2022

¶4

Varinder Singh

¶5

….Petitioner/Appellant(s)

¶6

Through :- Mr. R.S. Thakur, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Ashwani Thakur, Advocate.

V/s

UT of J&K

….Respondent(s)

Through :- Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG

¶11

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAHUL BHARTI, JUDGE

¶12

ORDER 02.12.2022

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶14

The petitioner is a Deputy Superintendent of Police (Dy.SP) posted in the Establishment of Crime Branch, Jammu. The petitioner found himself arrested and taken into police custody pursuant to FIR no. 15/2022 for alleged commission of offence under section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 registered with the Police Station, Anti-Corruption Bureau, Jammu.

¶15

The situation which led to the registration of the aforesaid FIR against the petitioner is the complaint of one Davinder Singh S/o Late Pritam Singh R/o Khour Deonia, tehsil R.S. Pura, district Jammu made to the

¶16

2 Bail App No. 396/2022

¶17

Police Station Anti-Corruption Bureau, Jammu that the petitioner acting in abuse of his position as Dy. SP, Crime Branch, Jammu demanded bribe of rupees two lacs from the complainant by putting him to fear of implicating him in a false case. As per the complainant-Davinder Singh, the demand for money was to be served by payment of Rs. 50,000/- as installment part.

¶18

In the face of this situation, the complainant reported the matter to the Police Station Anti Corruption Bureau, Jammu which set up a trap for the purpose of catching the petitioner red handed in the course of demanding and accepting the bribe. The trap came to be carried out but as per the prosecution version, the petitioner fled away from the spot and as such the trap could not be carried out to its logical end inasmuch as even the alleged bribe money of Rs. 50,000/- could not be recovered from the petitioner after he came to be caught pursuant to chase by the trap team though the hand’s and pant’s wash of the petitioner was found bearing the treated powder which turned pink upon treatment. The arrest of the petitioner took place on 11.11.2022.

¶19

The petitioner came to approach the Court of Special Judge, AntiCorruption, Jammu for the purpose of seeking bail which came to be denied to him by the Special Judge, Anti-Corruption, Jammu vide its order dated 19.11.2022. It is now more than twenty days in running that the petitioner is under confinement pursuant to his arrest. The present nature of custody of the petitioner is judicial custody.

¶20

3 Bail App No. 396/2022

¶21

Anything said for and against the prosecution or for that matter even the petitioner in the context of considering the present bail application may prejudice the case of either side but this Court cannot avoid noticing the fact that the trap laid by the trap team of the Anti Corruption Bureau, Jammu did not result in success as the petitioner was not found red handed demanding and accepting the bribe amount of Rs. 50,000/- from the said Davinder Singh and as such to lend credence to the story, the investigating authority has put up a plea that the petitioner fled away from the catch of the trap team which plea may ultimately get proved to be true but for the time being does not seem plausible.

¶22

The respondent, in its objections, does not advert to factual situation as to which was the place where the trap was to be carried out and actually carried out and how the petitioner made an escape from the said trap. The petitioner, in his bail application, has adverted to the fact that he was seized of a preliminary verification (PV) assigned to him on the complaint of one Navjeet Singh S/o Gopal Singh R/o Bishnah by reference to section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1989 and in reference to the said complaint, the petitioner had put Davinder Singh, the complainant of FIR no. 15/2022 to attend the preliminary verification exercise in the Crime Branch Police Station, Jammu.

¶23

It is pleaded by the petitioner that in order to undermine the said preliminary verification exercise that said Davinder Singh orchestrated a plan to entangle the petitioner herein so that the petitioner is able to be dislocated from the preliminary verification exercise being done against

¶24

4 Bail App No. 396/2022

¶25

the complainant-Davinder Singh. This factual plea of the petitioner made in the bail application has been avoided to be responded by the respondent-Anti Corruption Bureau, Jammu for the reasons best known to it and that may lend some force to the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the alleged trap was an attempt on the part of the complainant-Davinder Singh to take the Anti Corruption Bureau Jammu for a ride.

¶26

In the backdrop of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that the FIR relates to the trap case for demand and acceptance of bribe which is carried out in the presence of police officials of the anti corruption as well as the public servants solicited as shadow and independent witnesses, the investigation of the case is not supposed to last long for asking continuing custody of the petitioner.

¶27

In view of this, this Court sees no reason to deny bail to the petitioner in the present case as such the petitioner is held entitled to be released on bail subject to furnishing of bonds, personal as well as surety, to the amount of Rupees One Lac each to be furnished to the Investigating Officer of the FIR no. 15/2022 Police Station, Anti Corruption Bureau, Jammu. The grant of bail to the petitioner is subject to the following conditions:

¶28

i) That the petitioner shall not in any manner whatsoever interfere/intermeddle with the course of investigation of the case or tamper with the prosecution witnesses;

¶29

5 Bail App No. 396/2022

¶30

ii) That the petitioner shall not leave the UT of Jammu and Kashmir without prior permission in writing to the investigating officer dealing with FIR no. 15/2022;

¶31

iii) That the petitioner shall also ensure his full cooperation and attendance for the purpose of investigation as and when called upon by the investigating officer.

¶32

Any act of omission and commission on the part of the petitioner in observing the bail conditions shall entail cancellation of bail hereby being granted by this Court.

¶33

Bail application is disposed of accordingly.

¶34

(Rahul Bharti) Judge

¶35

JAMMU 02.12.2022 Naresh/PS

Varinder Singh v. Ut of J and K Th Senior Suprintendent of Police Anti Corruption Bureau Jammu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Varinder Singh v. Ut of J and K Th Senior Suprintendent of Police Anti Corruption Bureau Jammu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kamlesh Sharma Vs Dilip Kumar Gill

Sachin Gupta Vs State of J and K Th. Commissioner Secretary Home Dept. and Ors.

Brij Lal and Anr. Vs State Th.Irrigation Deptt.and Anr.

Shagoofa Ali Shoket and Ors. Vs State Th.Incharge Women Cell Rajouri

Pawan Singh Vs U T of J and K Th SHO Police Station Mahore and Another

Bansi Lal and Ors. Vs Ut of J and K Th Incharge Police Station Women Cell Gandhi Nagar and Anr.