← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/7559/2019dismissed

Gurmail Singh v. State Of Punjab

2019-02-22Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM No.M-7559 of 2019 (O&M) Date of Decision: February 22, 2019 Gurmail Singh

...Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

Present:

Mr.Jaswinder Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

**** INDERJIT SINGH, J.

Petitioner has filed this second petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.21 dated 24.07.2018 under Sections 7/13(1)(D) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act and Sections 342, 343, 384, 388, 389, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Vigilance Bureau, Patiala. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the record.

From the record, I find that the earlier bail petition filed by the petitioner was got dismissed as withdrawn after hearing the arguments for sometime, when this Court was not inclined to issue notice of motion. Now again, second petition has been filed. No fresh ground or changed circumstance has been shown after withdrawal of the first bail petition. VINEET GULATI 2019.02.26 10:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh As per the FIR, serious allegations have been levelled against

CRM No.M-7559 of 2019 -2the petitioner that he in connivance with SI Sikandar Singh co-accused took `7 lakhs and released Dhanwant Singh. Similarly, there are allegations that further `7 lakhs was paid to the accused. There is also allegation that accused demanded `7 lakhs more to release Harjinder Singh and later, present petitioner along with SI Sikander Singh received the amount. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case and in view of the nature and gravity of the offence, I do not find it a fit case where petitioner is entitled to benefit of anticipatory bail. The petitioner is required for custodial interrogation.

Therefore, finding no merit in the present petition, the same is dismissed.

February 22, 2019 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No VINEET GULATI 2019.02.26 10:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh