Dismissed

Krishan Singh v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC11 Apr 2013CRM-M/11626/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order deals with a petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for anticipatory bail. The High Court dismissed the petition due to allegations of large-scale forgery and the petitioner's involvement in handling fake licenses, finding no ground for bail.

What did the court decide?

No grounds were made out for grant of anticipatory bail as the petitioner was dealing with fake licenses.

Krishan Singh Vs State of Haryana — Corruption | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

-: 1 :-

¶2

Crl. Misc. No. M-11626 of 2013 (O&M)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Crl. Misc. No. M-11626 of 2013 (O&M) Date of decision: April 11, 2013.

¶5

Krishan Singh

¶6

... Petitioner(s)

¶7

¶8

State of Haryana

¶9

... Respondent(s)

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARAMJEET SINGH Present: Shri Gaurav Arora, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶11

Paramjeet Singh, J. (Oral):

¶12

The present petition has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner in case arising out of FIR No.116 dated 23.2.2013, registered at Police Station Nuh, District Mewat, under Sections 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC and 7, 13(1) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

¶13

There are allegations in the FIR that SI Naresh Kumar, Flying Suqad of Chief Minister, Haryana was investigating FIR No.39 dated 30.1.2013 registered at Police Station Tauru, under Sections 379, 411, 420, 474, 475, 467, 468, 471, 188, 120-B IPC, 3(2) PPDP Act and 3/181 and 3/92 of the MV Act that it came to his notice that number of fake licences on the fake and forged documents have been issued by RTA Office at Nuh. At that point of time, the petitioner was working as a Clerk in the Transport Department.

¶14

Learned Counsel for the petitioner states that there is no specific allegation in the FIR.

¶15

Crl. Misc. No. M-11626 of 2013 (O&M) -: 2 :-

¶16

I have considered the contention of learned Counsel for the

¶17

petitioner.

¶18

There are allegations that the petitioner along with other persons has even taken away 18 files which are yet to be recovered by the police. Since the petitioner was handling all kinds of driving licences etc., presumption was raised that these files were with him. There is a specific mention in the FIR that number of driving licences have been issued and renewed at RTA Office, Nuh; even serial number of the licences has been mentioned therein. While renewal was issued, no NOC was sought. Basic purpose of the FIR is just to set the law into motion. This fact has come in the notice of the Additional Sessions Judge when the police authorities appeared and it appears that this fact surfaced only at that point of time. Learned Counsel for the petitioner states that these files have been taken away by the investigating agency. It is not for this Court to appreciate this issue while deciding the anticipatory bail application. There is no document on record to suggest that these files are in custody of a particular person.

¶19

Keeping in view the above fact that there is a large scale forging of documents and the petitioner is one of the persons who was dealing with fake licences at that point of time, no ground for the grant of anticipatory bail is made out.

¶20

Dismissed.

¶21

April 11, 2013. kadyan

Krishan Singh v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishan Singh v. State of Haryana

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

Satnam Singh Vs State of Punjab

Dharampal and Ors. Vs State of Haryana

Sanjeev Sharma Vs State of Punjab

Sandeep Abrol Vs State of Haryana etc.

Mewa Singh Vs Union Territory of Chandigarh and Ors.

Ravi Yadav Vs State of Haryana