Lakhdeep Singh v. State Of Punjab

CRM-M-20280-2021 [ 1 ]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-20280-2021 Date of Decision: 25.05.2021 Lakhdeep Singh......................................................Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab........................................................... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL ...

(through video conferencing)

Present:

Mr. Harshit Jain, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Luvinder Sofat, AAG, Punjab.

...

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (Oral) Prayer in the present petition is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 53 dated 20.03.2021 under Sections 379-B, 411 IPC registered at Police Station Dirba, District Sangrur. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case in hand which is evident from the fact that neither was he named in the FIR in question nor did he snatch the bag containing Rs.10,000/- from the complainant when the co-accused went to the petrol pump on the pretext of getting the fuel filled. Learned counsel submits that in fact the petitioner was in custody in another FIR, hence he could not have been present or in any way connected with the crime in question which took place on 20.03.2021. Learned counsel thus prays for the concession of SURESH KUMAR 2021.05.25 19:27 I agree to specified portions of this document bail to the petitioner as he has been in custody since 08.04.2021 and even

CRM-M-20280-2021 [ 2 ] challan has not been presented till date.

Per contra the learned State counsel, while opposing the prayer and submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions from ASI Om Parkash has apprised the court that the petitioner is a man of criminal antecedents as there are two other similar cases registered against him. He has further controverted the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he could not have been present in the case in hand by submitting that the petitioner was involved in another similar case on 28.03.2021 i.e. just a few days after the occurrence in question. It has been submitted that it was during his interrogation that it came to light that the petitioner was also involved in the occurrence in question. Learned counsel has submitted that the investigation is still underway and hence the petitioner may not be extended the concession of bail, more so keeping in view his criminal antecedents.

Heard.

In view of the above, no ground for the grant of bail to the petitioner is made out.

The petition is dismissed.

( MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) 25.05.2021 JUDGE rupi Note: Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable:

Yes / No SURESH KUMAR 2021.05.25 19:27 I agree to specified portions of this document