Harjit Kaur @ Dimpi v. State Of Punjab

 



 




 





!
"#$%$ &'
( )
*+*% ,
 

  

        '
-.
/0
/ 
 /
 

    !" 

   #  $$$  /
,

1.2'  &' () "' *+,-..-./0.01' " 2-3+43-/.)" ' "#     "5 "

).-./0.03 ))''   6

)55    " )  '6&   5" '    30 ..  +* 50.01  6 6  '"   ")       5  ' 6& )"6" '5

 7 ' " !')& ' 6"

703.10.01 6'   )6&    "

)% "

)6 6) 5  

 6&6      3....8(6 6 & 5    ))6 6 '7&'

   5     "

)5 5'        &     5            ")'  %  "

) "

"&      ')  ")!""   0.....8(&  ) 

6 '7 956  " 6&&'

 "  &65 ")       "    6&'  "

 5&'"'  '*+ !'   65 

 '       

!

)"' () )) 4 6  !0:./0.01 0   )5   ' ' 5 " )  ))5

)"  "% )55(!5 '  

)" )5  );5 "

)""") 5*+ ')'5 "

))55 ' " )  &'' ) 5  )5 

6  )  ))' "' 
" )'<  5 !',"!5" %  '  !))6 4.

Status report has been filed by the respondent-State. It is argued

 by learned State counsel that the recovery of the stolen articles and money is to be effected from the petitioner. She has been specifically named in the FIR. No extra ordinary or sparing circumstance has even otherwise been made out for the purpose of extending benefit of bail to the petitioner. '  !))6 5.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned State counsel at considerable length and have gone through the record carefully.

6.

The petitioner is alleged to have committed theft of gold and silver articles as well as cash amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- from the house of the complainant. For effecting recovery as well as for conducting thorough investigation in the matter, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required. The petitioner has failed to point out any extra ordinary and exceptional circumstances thereby making her entitled to seek benefit of prearrest bail. It is 6)))  )6 6  "12-4495 66 9" 9" ) '""

"    )    ))') " " )"5 )4 

5  ) " '" )'+ ) "'' () '

!6    ""95"" "  6 !   "+  "    " )  '       <     " "'

 '

!' 5 )" ""')5' 

  9' ()  
"    7.

+ 6!") !  !  ))" 9    " 8.

"              '



)"5 "  











3 /
4


  ( )
*+*% ,