High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/25562/2018dismissed

Som Nath v. State Of Punjab

2018-08-14Mr. Justice Arvind Singh Sangwan2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM No.M-25562 of 2018 (O&M) Date of Decision: August 14, 2018 Som Nath

...Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

Present:

Mr.Sandeep Arora, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms.Monika Jalota, DAG, Punjab for the respondent-State.

Mr.D.S.Kahlon, Advocate for the complainant.

**** INDERJIT SINGH, J.

Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.25 dated 13.03.2018 under Section 420 IPC, registered at Police Station Kahanwan, District Pathankot. Notice of motion was issued. Learned State counsel appeared and contested the petition.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record. From the record, I find that as per FIR, Thakur Dass, father of Kamni Devi and Rohit, along with Amir Singh, Sanjeev Singh, Mandeep VINEET GULATI 2018.08.17 12:24 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh Singh and Pallavi, came into contact with accused Som Nath, who allured

CRM No.M-25562 of 2018 -2that he is having links with Director, Punjab Health Department and he will get appointed Kamni Devi, Rohit etc. appointed on the post of Surveyor and demanded `2 lakhs from each candidate. As per the allegations, he took the money but has not got appointed them. Later on, he got issued appointment letters for the Class IV vacancy in Forest Department, Hoshiarpur. It is also in the FIR that some amount has also been deposited in the account of the petitioner.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case and there being no explanation regarding depositing of money in the account of the petitioner and in view of the serious allegations against him, I find that petitioner is required for custodial interrogation and no ground is made out for grant of anticipatory bail to him. Therefore, finding no merit in the present petition, the same is dismissed.

The order dated 12.07.2018 granting interim bail to the petitioner stands vacated.

August 14, 2018 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No VINEET GULATI 2018.08.17 12:24 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh