In a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C, the court rejected arguments that recovery was planted. Finding the recovered large sum credible, the judge dismissed the plea for regular bail during the evidence recording stage.
Prayer for grant of regular bail dismissed.
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.
#1#
Crl.M.No.27413-M of 2010
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND
HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Crl.M.No.27413-M of 2010
Date of Order: 6.10.2010
Dilbag Singh and others
.....Petitioners
Vs.
State of Punjab
.....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH
Present: Mr. D.S. Pheruman, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, AAG, Punjab.
JASWANT SINGH, J (ORAL)
Prayer under Section 439 Cr.P.C is for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.32 dated 22.6.2010 under Sections 457/380/411 IPC, P.S Khemkaran, District Tarn Taran.
As per allegations in the FIR, petitioners, who are stated to be laborers in the shop of the complainant, by entering the shop of the complainant through the Ventilator committed theft of Rs.4,09,000/- during the intervening night of 21/22.6.2010.
Learned counsel submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case and that the recovery effected in this case is also planted one. It is submitted that the alleged recovery, which is stated to be stolen from the safe of the complainant, was never effected from the petitioners despite the investigation being conducted through the dog squad as well as finger prints experts. Petitioner is stated to be in custody since 25.6.2010.
#2#
Crl.M.No.27413-M of 2010
Learned state counsel, on instructions from SI Mulakh Raj, states that the charge in the present case has been framed and the case is at the stage of recording of prosecution evidence. It is also submitted that the recovery effected from the petitioners is Rs.3,70,000/-.
In my opinion, a huge amount has been recovered from the petitioner, which cannot be said to be planted one.
Without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find no ground to grant the concession of bail to the petitioner.
Dismissed.
October 06, 2010 ( JASWANT SINGH ) manoj JUDGE
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Dilbag Singh and others
State of Punjab
Jaswant Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
