Amit Passi And Another v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-18096 of 2021 (O&M) Date of Decision: 29.07.2021 Amit Passi and another

...Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMOL RATTAN SINGH Present:- Mr. Pushpinder Kaushal, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Ramdeep Partap Singh, DAG, Punjab.

Mr. Akashdeep Miglani, Advocate, for the complainant. Amol Rattan Singh, J. (Oral) Case heard by way of video conferencing.

CRM no.21281 of 2021 Vide this application, the applicants (petitioners in the accompanying petition) seek to withdraw the accompanying petition which is one by which they seek to be admitted to bail under the provisons of Section 438 of the Cr.P.C, upon FIR no.222, dated 25.08.2019, having been registered at Police Station Moti Nagar, District Ludhiana, alleging therein the commission of offences punishable under Sections 420 and 120B of the IPC.

Notice in the application, with Mr. Ramdeep Partap Singh, learned DAG, Punjab, accepting notice on behalf of the respondent State, on the asking of the court.

Naturally, he does not oppose the application. Consequently, the application is allowed.

-2CRM-M-18096 of 2021 In view of the above, this petition is dismissed as having been withdrawn.

Pursuant to the earlier passed, an affidavit of the Commissioner of Police, Ludhiana, dated 22.07.2021 has been filed, which is ordered to be taken on record.

Of course, it is to be noticed by this court that in its earlier order, this court had directed the Commissioner to comment as to whether any offence has been made out against the complainant for giving a bribe to the petitioners to obtain admission for his daughter in a medical college. To that query, the Commissioner has, surprisingly, (without explaining anything on merits otherwise as regards whether any offence was made out or not for allegedly giving a bribe), stated that the intention of the complainant "...was not to bribe any person but to get admission for his daughter in one way or the other."

I would find it rather strange that if a person is bribing someone to get admission for his daughter one way or the other , the Commissioner should take such a stand.

However, this petition is one seeking anticipatory bail and the petitioner having withdrawn the said petition, no further comment is being made by this court.

It is of course also to be noticed that the Commissioner has stated that the petitioners have not joined investigation despite the order of

-3this court.

29.07.2021 (AMOL RATTAN SINGH) vcgarg JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking: Yes Whether reportable:

No