In a bail petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C., this court rejected the petitioner's claim of ignorance regarding a film star's identity and held him guilty of fraud, denying the concession of pre-arrest bail.
The petition for grant of pre-arrest bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. was 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.
Crl. Misc. No. M-13681 of 2013 (O&M)
-: 1 :-
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Crl. Misc. No. M-13681 of 2013 (O&M) Date of decision: May 08, 2013.
Saudagar Singh Numberdar
... Petitioner(s)
v.
State of Punjab
... Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARAMJEET SINGH
Present: Shri Vishavjeet Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Paramjeet Singh, J. (Oral):
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. 11 dated 4.12.2012, registered at Police Station Vigilance Bureau, Ludhiana, District Ludhiana, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC and Sections 13(1)d) read with 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
Learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is a Lambardar and is not a beneficiary as he has only identified the executant; he was not aware as to who was that person.
Contention of learned Counsel for the petitioner cannot be accepted that he was not aware of the person. Property belongs to celebrity film-star Dharmender. Every body, at least in the northern part of the country, very well knows Dharmender. Therefore, the plea of the petitioner that he did not know the person who had impersonated as Dharmender, is untenable. The offence becomes all the more serious when a person in this
Crl. Misc. No. M-13681 of 2013 (O&M) -: 2 :-
part of the country feigns ignorance regarding identity of film-star Dharmender.
It also needs to be clarified that the petitioner belongs to village Partap Singh Wala whereas the property in dispute is situated in village Haibowal, therefore, the petitioner could not have simply identified saying that he is not a resident of Haibowal.
Keeping in view the fact that the petitioner has identified a wrong person and is a party to the fraud, he is not entitled to the concession of pre-arrest bail.
Dismissed.
May 08, 2013. kadyan
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to pre-arrest bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. when he is found to be party to fraud by impersonating a known celebrity.
Whether the plea of ignorance regarding the identity of the film-star Dharmender is tenable.
Whether the petitioner's residence being different from the location of the disputed property supports the plea of non-involvement.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Saudagar Singh Numberdar
State of Punjab
Paramjeet Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
