High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/34083/2022dismissed

Pawan Kumar v. State Of Punjab

2022-08-04Mr. Justice Harnaresh Singh Gill2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-34083-2022 (O&M) Date of Decision: 04.08.2022 PAWAN KUMAR ... Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL

Present:

Mr. Sandeep Arora, Advocate for the petitioner.

**** HARNARESH SINGH GILL, J.(Oral) Through this petition, the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case bearing FIR No.41 dated 12.04.2022, registered under Sections 61, and 78(2) of the Punjab excise Act, 1914 and Section 420 IPC, at Police Station Division No.1, Jalandhar.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a liquor contractor by profession and doing business with Raman Kumar, his brother; that during inquiry, Raman Kumar was exonerated and that the petitioner has no concern with co-accused, namely, Jasbir Singh and Gurdeep Singh.

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. As per the prosecution version, on the basis of a secret information, raid was conducted at the spot; Jasbir Singh was apprehended and from him 25 boxes of liquor make 111 Gold Pure Grain Whisky were recovered. On the basis of the disclosure statement of Jasbir AMAN JAIN 2022.08.05 17:52 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

CRM-M-34083-2022 (O&M) -2Singh, the petitioner and his brother have been indicted in the present case with an allegation that they both have stored a huge quantity of the said liquor in a godown at Village Dhaliwal Bet. On the search made at the said godown, one Gurdeep Singh was apprehended and from him 275 boxes of aforesaid liquor were recovered. Further, as per para 9 of the petition itself, there are six more cases registered against the petitioner. This facts clearly shows that the petitioner is a person with criminal antecedents and keeping in view the fact that the petitioner is a habitual offenders, he does not deserve concession of the anticipatory bail. Moreover, the nature of the offences committed by the petitioner is sufficient enough to hold that if released on bail, he would again involve himself in similar crime.

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

Dismissed.

04.08.2022 (HARNARESH SINGH GILL) Aman Jain JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No AMAN JAIN 2022.08.05 17:52 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment