Dismissed

Baljinder Singh v. State of Punjab and Another

Punjab & Haryana HC24 Nov 2023CRM-M/47424/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed a petition seeking cancellation of bail granted to an accused in a corruption case. The petitioner alleged intimidation by the accused. The Court directed the State to expedite prosecution sanction and trial proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed; State directed to expedite prosecution sanction and ensure expedited trial.

Baljinder Singh Vs State of Punjab and Another — Corruption | Punjab & Haryana HC (2023)

¶1

CRM-M-47424-2021

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM-M-47424-2021

¶5

Reserved on: 20.11.2023 Pronounced on: 24.11.2023

Baljinder Singh

...Pe��oner

Versus

State of Punjab and another …Respondent

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

¶11

Present: Ms. Jyo�noor Kaur Sethi, Advocate for

¶12

Mr. Rahul Dhanda, Advocate for the pe��oner.

¶13

Mr. Shiva Khurmi, AAG, Punjab.

¶14

Mr. Suvir Sidhu, Advocate for respondent No. 2 (Through VC)

¶15

¶16

ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

¶17

FIR No.	Dated	Police Sta/on	Sec/ons
05	03.05.2021	Vigilance Bureau,	7 of Preven�on of Corrup�on
		Phase-1,Mohali	Act,1988 Act and 120-B IPC

¶18

Seeking cancella�on of bail granted to respondent No. 2, the pe��oner had come up before this Court on the ground that respondent No. 2 had threatened and in�midated the pe��oner and dissuaded him from sta�ng truth in the Court.

¶19

The Sessions Court SAS, Nagar (Mohali) had granted bail to respondent no. 2 vide order dated 02.06.2021. A9er that on 11.07.2023, the pe��oner claims that she was threatened by two persons at the instance of accused/respondent No.2. On this, the pe��oner had approached the Vigilance Bureau and filed a complaint (Annexure P-2).

¶20

State counsel submits that they did not find any truthfulness in the allega�ons of the pe��oner. However, the necessary steps for launching prosecu�on are going on and it would be appropriate to refer paragraphs 6 to 8 of the reply dated 20.11.2023 filed by the concerned Dy.S.P., which reads as follows:

¶21

6. That the competent authority of the accused/respondent no. 02 Simarpreet Kaur, Mining Officer i.e. Principal Secretary to the Government of Punjab, Department of Water Resources, denied the prosecu(on sanc(on vide passing Speaking Order

¶22

JYOTI 2023.11.24 15:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶23

CRM-M-47424-2021

¶24

¶25

dated 12.05.2023. In this regard, vide le.er dated 15.08.2023, the comments of the Vigilance Bureau have been sought by the Vigilance Department, Government of Punjab. The copy of le.er dated 14.08.2023 along with Speaking Order dated 12.05.2023 is appended as Annexure R-1/T.

¶26

7. That the Vigilance Bureau, Punjab again sent the case of the accused/respondent no. 02 Simarpreet Kaur, Mining Officer to the Principal Secretary to the Government of Punjab, Department of Water Resources for reconsidering to issue the prosecu(on sanc(on through Vigilance Department vide le.er dated 01.09.2023, that is s(ll awaited. The copy of le.er dated 01.09.2023 is appended as Annexure R-2/T.

¶27

8. That currently, the case of Prosecu(on Sanc(on qua respondent no. 2 is pending with the office of competent authority Le. Principal Secretary to the Government of Punjab, Department of Water Resources.

¶28

Mr. Suvir Sidhu , counsel appearing for the respondent no.2 at this stage submits that pe��oner is very influen�al and the allega�ons of threat and in�mida�on have been wrongly cited.

¶29

Be that as it may, considering the sensi�ve post which respondent no.2 is holding, counsel for the pe��oner would be contended and sa�sfied if the State is directed to expedite the steps for launching prosecu�on.

¶30

In the en�rety of facts and circumstances, although this Court is dismissing the present pe��on, however, the State is directed to expedite the procedure regarding sanc�on and in case, they decide to launch prosecu�on, the State shall ensure that the trial is expedited. It shall be open for the pe��oner to come up this Court again in case the accused or the State sit on the file or to delay the trial.

¶31

Given above, the present pe��on is disposed of with the aforesaid observa�ons.

¶32

(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 24.11.2023 Jyo�-II Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: No.

¶33

JYOTI 2023.11.24 15:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

Baljinder Singh v. State of Punjab and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Baljinder Singh v. State of Punjab and Another

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

Harjinder Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Others

Poonam Vs State of Haryana

Deepak Shekhawat Vs State of Haryana and Another

Bhupinder Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Bahadur Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab

Karnail Singh Vs State of Punjab