Dismissed

Jasbir Singh @ Jassa v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC9 Jul 2012CRM-M/19527/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-judge oral order dismissing an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The court held that due to serious allegations of forming a gang for extortion and dacoity, necessitating custodial interrogation, the petition lacks merit.

What did the court decide?

Petition for anticipatory bail dismissed; custody of petitioner deemed necessary for interrogation.

Jasbir Singh @ Jassa Vs State of Punjab — Narcotics (NDPS) | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

Crl.M.No.M-19527 of 2012(O&M)

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶4

Crl.M.No.M-19527 of 2012(O&M) Date of Decision: July 9, 2012

Jasbir Singh @ Jassa

.....Petitioner

State of Punjab

.....Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA

¶11

Present: Mr.D.S.Pheruman Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

.....

¶13

RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral)

¶14

Crl.M.No.37801 of 2012

¶15

Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions.

¶16

Crl.M.No.M-19527 of 2012

¶17

The present petition filed under Section 438 read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.27/2012, dated 23.2.2012, under Sections 399/402 IPC and under Section 25 of the Arms Act, registered at Police Station Chheharta, District Amritsar.

¶18

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the whole record carefully, including the impugned order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar, vide which application filed on behalf of the present petitioner for anticipatory bail was dismissed.

¶19

Brief allegations against petitioner-accused are that there was secret information with the police that petitioner alongwith co-accused, whose names were also mentioned in the FIR had formed a gang who used

¶20

-2-

¶21

Crl.M.No.M-19527 of 2012(O&M)

¶22

to make extortion in the odd hours from general public while armed with deadly weapons and that they were planning to commit a dacoity while sitting on a vacant plot near Polytechnic College. Raid was conduced. Two of the co-accused were arrested and, however, petitioner and other accused succeeded in running away. Three stolen motor-cycles and some deadly weapons were recovered from the spot.

¶23

It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioneraccused that petitioner was not arrested from the spot and that he is being implicated on the basis of statement of co-accused, as is clear from Annexure P2, an application for seeking police remand of the accused, who was arrested on the spot, which is not admissible against petitioner-accused.

¶24

However, name of petitioner has been mentioned in the FIR on

¶25

the basis of secret information. His name has also been disclosed by coaccused. Allegations are serious in nature. Hence, in view of these facts, it is not such a case in which extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner-accused. Rather custodial interrogation of the petitioner-accused is necessary.

¶26

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition filed by petitioner-Jasbir Singh @ Jassa for grant of anticipatory bail is, hereby, dismissed being devoid of any merit.

¶27

meenu

¶28

(Ram Chand Gupta) Judge

¶29

9 .7.2012

Jasbir Singh @ Jassa v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jasbir Singh @ Jassa v. State of Punjab

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

Saroop Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Mamta Rani & Another Vs State of Punjab and Others

Narinder Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Channi Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Surinder Kumar and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Bhagat Ram and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.