Inder Tej Paul Singh @ Tejinder Bir Singh v. State Of Punjab

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ......

Criminal Misc. No.M-27905 of 2016 .....

Date of decision:30.8.2016 Inder Tej Paul Singh alias Tejinder Bir Singh

...Petitioner

v.

State of Punjab

...Respondent

....

Coram:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh .....

Present:

Mr. Harsh Chopra, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Shivali, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.

.....

Inderjit Singh, J.

The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.58 dated 20.7.2016 registered for the offences under Sections 3, 4 and 5 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1959 at Police Station Division No.3, Ludhiana City, District Ludhiana. Notice of motion has been issued in this case. Ms. Shivali, learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent-State and contested this petition.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab and have gone through the record. Harpal Singh Parmar 2016.09.02 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Cr. Misc. No.M-27905 of 2016 [2] As per the prosecution version, the FIR has been registered on a secret information and a raid was stated to be conducted in Hotel Paras where four persons including two ladies were recovered. The allegation against the present petitioner is that he is running the prostitution racket in the rooms of the hotel.

Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner is not the owner of the hotel. Petitioner's son is the owner of the hotel and he relied upon the copy of the sale deed.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, nature and gravity of the offences and the serious allegation against the present petitioner, I do not find it a fit case where the present petitioner is entitled to the benefit of anticipatory bail. Therefore, finding no merit in this petition, the same is dismissed.

August 30, 2016.

(Inderjit Singh) Judge *hsp* NOTE:

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes Whether reportable:

No Harpal Singh Parmar 2016.09.02 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh