Karnak Verma v. State Of Punjab

CRM-M No. 32744 of 2022 (O&M) -1In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh CRM-M No. 32744 of 2022 (O&M) Date of Decision: 02.8.2022 Karnak Verma ......Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESHWAR THAKUR

Present:

Mr. Aditya Sanghi, Advocate, Mr. Devender Rattan, Advocate and Mr. Ashwani Bhardwaj, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Bhupender Beniwal, AAG, Punjab.

**** SURESHWAR THAKUR , J.

(ORAL) CRM-26493-2022 The application is allowed as prayed for.

CRM-M-32744-2022 1.

The instant petition has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C., seeking the indulgence of regular bail, to the petitioner. 2.

In FIR bearing No. 156 of 4.5.2022, registered at Police Station 'A' Division, District Amritsar, the offences constituted under Sections 171, 420, 467, 468, 471 of the IPC, are embodied.

3.

The present petitioner is alleged to, through preparing a fake ID, making public pretences of his being an IFS officer, and, also he is alleged to, on the front, and, back of his vehicle bearing No. HR26-CT-6086, display thereins, the logo of Government of India, besides he is alleged to, install thereon, government lights, respectively displaying red, and, blue colour lights. 4.

Irrespective of the merits of the case, since the learned State counsel, on instructions given to him by SI Resham Singh, submits, that the GURPREET SINGH 2022.08.02 19:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M No. 32744 of 2022 (O&M) -2petitioner has caused his making the recovery of the fake ID Card, and, also has caused his makings recovery of the crime vehicle, to the investigating officer concerned, and, also when the present petitioner has stepped into judicial custody on 4.5.2022, thereupon, the above prolonged judicial custody of the present petitioner, is not required to be prolonged any longer, as then it would unnecessarily fetter, and, curtail his personal liberty. Moreover, when, at this stage, no evidence has been adduced by the prosecution, suggestive of the fact, that in the event of the bail petitioner being enlarged on regular bail, there is every likelihood of his fleeing from justice, and/or, tampering with prosecution evidence.

5.

Consequently, the instant petition is allowed, and, the petitionerbail applicant is ordered to be released from judicial custody, if not required in any other case. However, the granting of bail to the bail applicant-petitioner, is subject to his furnishing personal and surety bonds in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- each, before the learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned, and, also subject to his not tampering with prosecution evidence, and, also his not influencing prosecution witnesses, and, besides also his appearing before the trial Court concerned, as and when directed to make his personal appearance unless validly exempted.

6.

The afore observations are meant only for the disposal of the present petition, and, shall not affect the merits of the trial arising from the FIR (supra).

7.

Copy dasti.

(SURESHWAR THAKUR) JUDGE August 02, 2022 Gurpreet Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No GURPREET SINGH 2022.08.02 19:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh