The High Court granted bail to the petitioner in an embezzlement case after the trial court reported that the trial would exceed six months while the petitioner had been in custody since his surrender in December 2008.
Petitioner released on bail subject to furnishing bonds and sureties satisfying the trial court.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Criminal Misc. No. M-7846 of 2009
1
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh.
Criminal Misc. No. M-7846 of 2009
Date of Decision: 18.4.2009
Pritam Singh
…Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
…Respondent
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA.
Present: Mr. Sukhdeep Singh Sandhu, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Anter Singh Brar, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, for the State.
Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral)
The present petition has been preferred under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 67 dated 23.4.1989 Police Station Makhu under Section 408 IPC.
On 23.3.2009, this Court had passed the following order:-
“Petitioner has earlier preferred Criminal Misc. No. M-4541 of 2009 which was decided on 17.2.2009 and the following order was passed:-
“FIR was registered against the petitioner on 23.4.1989. He was declared as Proclaimed Offender on 13.11.1991. Petitioner has surrendered
Criminal Misc. No. M-7846 of 2009
2
in the Court on 29.12.2008. It is alleged that petitioner, while acting as Secretary of the Society, has embezzled the amount of Rs.30,850/-.
Case of the petitioner is that he has deposited amount of Rs.1,68,000/- along with interest on 21.12.1993. It is further stated in the petition that at one point of time, submission of cancellation report was being considered.
Taking these submission of petitioner into consideration, Senior Superintendent of Police, Ferozepur, is directed to conclude the investigation within one month and submit final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C.
Petitioner may renew his prayer after submission of report under Section 173 Cr.P.C.
With the observations made above, the present petition is disposed off”.
Petitioner has annexed Annexure P4 i.e.
supplementary challan submitted by the Investigating Officer. It has been noticed therein that the entire evidence has been recorded against the petitioner under Section 299 Cr.P.C. Trial Court is directed to submit a status report regarding recording of evidence under Section 299 Cr.P.C. The trial Court shall also submit tentative schedule for conclusion of trial.
Criminal Misc. No. M-7846 of 2009
3
Adjourned to 18.4.2009.
Status report and tentative schedule be called from the trial Court by the Registry through fax.”
In pursuance of the order dated 23.3.2009, the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Zira, has submitted the following report:-
“2. It is respectfully submitted that as the accused surrendered before this Court on 29.12.2008, the prosecution also filed supplementary challan against the accused on 9.3.09. This Court has also summoned original file from the record room. Perusal to the original file, it has been revealed that prosecution has cited list of 15 witnesses. The prosecution examined only 3 witnesses in the evidence under Section 299 of Cr.P.C. The present case pertains to the embezzlement of amount of Rs.30,850/- of Makhu Nau Abad Co-operative Society by the Accused. The record pertains to the year 1988 & 1989 which is very old one. To conclude the present case all the 15 witnesses are to be examined including the witnesses who were examined under Section 299 of Cr.P.C. to afford an opportunity to accused to cross examine them.
Criminal Misc. No. M-7846 of 2009
4
the conclusion of trial tentatively would take more than six months”.
Since the trial will take at least six months to conclude and the petitioner is in custody since 29.12.2008, further detention of the petitioner is not warranted.
Hence, the present petition is accepted and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to furnishing of bail bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court. The trial Court shall ensure that adequate sureties are furnished by the petitioner and he is not able to flee again from India.
Trial be concluded within six months, as specified by the trial
Court.
(Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge
April 18, 2009 “ DK ”
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to a petitioner already in custody pending trial scheduled to exceed six months.
Whether the trial court has been directed to expedite the conclusion of the trial.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Pritam Singh
State of Punjab
Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
