Dismissed

Shabbir v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC12 Jan 2017CRM-M/38408/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a petition for anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC. The petitioner faced serious allegations of extortion where money was collected from passengers under the guise of sharing with police but retained illegally. The court refused bail, citing the serious nature of the incidence and the wrong signal conveyed to society.

What did the court decide?

Petition under Section 438 CrPC for grant of anticipatory bail was dismissed.

Shabbir Vs State of Haryana — Corruption | Punjab & Haryana HC (2017)

¶1

CRM-M-38408-2016

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM-M-38408 of 2016 Date of Decision: 12.01.2017

Shabbir

......Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Haryana ....Respondent

¶9

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA

¶10

Present: Mr. Arjun Atri, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶11

Ms. Harpreet Kaur, AAG, Haryana.

¶12

¶13

SURINDER GUPTA, J.(Oral)

¶14

The present petition has been filed under Section 438 Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail to petitioner in case FIR No. 482 dated 07.11.2014 registered for offences punishable under Sections 384, 506 read with Section 34 IPC, at Police Station Punhana, District Mewat.

¶15

As per prosecution, FIR was registered on the complaint of Salim and Jamshed, who alleged extortion of money by the petitioner and other 15 persons from complainants and others for operating passenger vehicle (Max) on the pretext of paying the same to police. When complainants enquired from the concerned police officials about the amount being extracted by the petitioner and his associates, they came to know that nothing was being paid to police. Thereafter, on their refusal to pay booty to petitioner and his associates, they roughed up complainants and took away the money from their pockets.

¶16

Learned State counsel submits that after receipt of complaint

¶17

Jitender Kumar 2017.01.13 16:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶18

CRM-M-38408-2016

¶19

-2-

¶20

the matter was thoroughly enquired and statements of all the concerned witnesses were recorded. 13 of the accused named in the complaint were found to be innocent. The police found allegations against the petitioner and his other two associates, namely, Arshad and Shahid, as correct. Shahid has since been arrested. She further submits that custodial interrogation of the petitioner and Shahid is required by the police to effect recovery and for further investigation.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after the arrest of Shahid, recovery of allegedly extorted money has already been effected from him, as such, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required in this case. Moreover, there is no specific allegation against him that as to how much amount was extorted by him from the complainants or any other person.

¶22

On giving a careful thought to submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner and learned State counsel and on perusal of FIR and paperbook, I find that allegations against the petitioner are quite serious in nature. Such type of incidents create unrest and grant of benefit of anticipatory bail will convey a wrong signal in the society. I find no reason to exercise discretionary power for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶23

Instant petition has no merit and the same is dismissed.

¶24

( SURINDER GUPTA ) January 12, 2017 JUDGE jk Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No

¶25

Jitender Kumar 2017.01.13 16:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Shabbir v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shabbir 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

Gurbaksh Singh Tuggal Vs State of Punjab& Ors.

Hanif & Ors. Vs State of Haryana

Shipra Sonkar and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Harbir Vs State of Haryana

Sarabjit Singh Sandhu Vs State of Punjab & Anr.

Kuldeep Singh @ Tahal Singh &Ors Vs State of Punjab& Ors.