Manpreet Singh And ANR. v. State Of Punjab
CRM-M No. 8475 of 2022 -1In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh CRM-M No. 8475 of 2022 Date of Decision: 07.4.2022 Manpreet Singh and another ......Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab ......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESHWAR THAKUR
Present:
Mr. K.S.Sodhi, Advocate for the petitioners.
Ms. Bhavna Gupta, DAG, Punjab.
**** SURESHWAR THAKUR , J.
(ORAL) 1.
In FIR bearing No. 174 of 31.12.2021, registered at Police Station Bhogpur, District Jalandhar, offences constituted under Sections 379-B, 411 IPC, are embodied.
2.
The police received a secret information, with respect to the purported repeated indulgence(s) of the accused concerned, in snatching valuables from the victims concerned. The above secret information led the police officials concerned, to proceed to the crime site, and, at the crime site, on the relevant day, the police officials apprehended the bail petitioners, with two mobile phones. During the course of their respective custodial interrogations, as made by the investigating officer concerned, they disclosed that, apart from the above two mobile phones, as became snatched from the victim concerned, theirs also snatching another mobile phone. The ownership of one of the mobile phone has been ascertained but the ownership of the other two mobile phones, has not yet been established, and, is in the process of being established.
3.
The learned State counsel submits, that the present petitioners GURPREET SINGH 2022.04.08 15:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh have not yet been able to establish theirs owning the above two mobile
CRM-M No. 8475 of 2022 -2phones.
4.
Be that as it may, since the relevant recoveries occurred at the crime site, besides when the investigations into the FIR (supra), are complete, and, that a report under Section 173 Cr.P.C., has already been filed against the accused concerned, before the learned Committal Court concerned, and, also when no evidence is adduced before this Court by the prosecution, suggestive that in case, the facility of bail is granted to the bail applicant-petitioners, there is a likelihood of theirs being fleeing from justice, and, tampering with the prosecution evidence. Moreover, also when their custody has commenced since 31.12.2021. Consequently, this Court does not deem it fit, and, appropriate to prolong the judicial incarceration of the bail petitioners, as, thereupons their personal liberty would become unnecessarily fettered, and, curtailed.
5.
Consequently, the instant petition is allowed, and, the petitioners-bail applicants are ordered to be released from judicial custody. However, the granting of bail to the bail applicants-petitioners, is subject to theirs furnishing personal and surety bonds in the sum of `50,000/- each, before the learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned, and, also subject to theirs not tampering with prosecution evidence, and, theirs not influencing prosecution witnesses, and, besides also theirs appearing before the trial Court concerned, as and when directed to make their personal appearance, unless validly exempted. 6.
Copy dasti.
(SURESHWAR THAKUR) JUDGE April 07, 2022 Gurpreet Whether speaking/reasoned :
Yes/No Whether reportable :
Yes/No GURPREET SINGH 2022.04.08 15:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh