Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2007 DIGILAW 80 (PNJ)

Badal Alias Vicky v. State Of Punjab

2007-01-18

VIRENDER SINGH

body2007
Judgment Virender Singh, J. 1. This is a petition under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying for release of the petitioner on bail in an offence registered vide. FIR No.49 dated, 17.2.2006 under Sections 361, 366-A, 376, 419 and 120-B IPC. 2. The petitioner, who is the brother of one Rimpy, is facing trial in the afore stated offence. The role attributed to him is that he along with certain other persons had abducted the daughter of the complainant, namely Seema when she along with her mother was shopping in a bazar. 3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that Seema had married Rimpy of her own and that she is staying with him after marriage. On the strength of this, it was sought to be contended that no offence under Sections 361, 366-A, 376, 419 and 120-B IPC has been made out. 4. On 22.12.2006, counsel for the respondent had prayed for time to verify this fact whether Seema was staying with Rimpy. Today when the matter was taken up Seema was present in Court and she was questioned about her whereabouts to which she replied that she had married Rimpy of her own and was staying with him. HC Gurpreet Singh of Police Station Sadar Amritsar had categorically stated that she was staying with her parents. He had further stated that he had been instructed to say so by ASI Nirmal Singh of Police, Station Sadar Amritsar. 5. In view of the statement made by Seema, who was present in Court, the statement of HC Gurpreet Singh is on the face of it false. This is a serious lapse on the part of the prosecution and an attempt to mislead this Court also to obstruct the course of justice. This not only reflects an attempt of the police officials to obstruct the course of justice but it also reflects that they are in league with the complainant. Statements made before the Court are sacrosanct and cannot be ignored if a person makes a wrong averment. 6. This not only reflects an attempt of the police officials to obstruct the course of justice but it also reflects that they are in league with the complainant. Statements made before the Court are sacrosanct and cannot be ignored if a person makes a wrong averment. 6. In view of the aforesaid, let a show cause notice be issued to HC Gurpreet Singh and ASI Nirmal Singh of Police Station, Sadar Amritsar as to why proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act be not initiated against them for having obstructed the course of justice by making a false statement before the Court and by attempting to defeat the process of law, for 6.2.2007. 7. The petitioner shall be released on bail in terms of Section 439 Cr.P.C. subject to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, Amritsar.