Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 1283 (PNJ)

Gurcharan Singh v. State of Punjab

2012-09-24

JITENDRA CHAUHAN

body2012
JUDGMENT Mr. Jitendra Chauhan, J.: (Oral) - By filing the present petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner has sought pre-arrest bail in case FIR No.4 dated 9.9.2012, registered under Sections 7/8/12/13 (1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act at Police Station Vigilance Bureau Flying Squad-I, SAS Nagar, Mohali. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the demand and acceptance of any amount by the petitioner is not established. He further submits that the petitioner had already been transferred from Vigilance Bureau, Ludhiana on 30.8.2012. The FIR was registered on 1.9.2012. The FIR is motivated to frame the petitioner, as the complainant is a close friend of one Rakesh Gupta, Motor Vehicle Inspector, posted at Sangrur, whose premises were raided by the petitioner on 17.7.2012, and a huge cash and incriminating documents worth Rs.15 Crores including one Kg. 300 grams opium was recovered. 3. Heard and perused. 4. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the petitioner had raided the house of Rakesh Gupta, Motor Vehicle Inspector, and as per the inventory, many incriminating documents as well as the cash was recovered from there. The fact that the complainant is a friend of said Rakesh Gupta is also not in dispute. The allegation in the FIR is that one Budh Singh, claiming himself to be a conduit of the petitioner, demanded a sum of Rs.25 lacs for helping out the said Rakesh Gupta, through the complainant. The complainant alongwith said Budh Singh visited the residence of the petitioner and allegedly paid an amount of Rs. 25 lacs to him. However, on 1.9.2012, the Vigilance department conducted a raid at the office of the complainant as well. The complainant spoke to the petitioner in this regard on his mobile phone. As he had already been transferred, he expressed his helplessness to help the complainant and in turn offered to return the alleged amount. The complainant also spoke to said Budh Singh as made out from the call records. From the locations of the towers, it also emerges that the complainant, alleged conduit Budh Singh and the petitioner were on the same locations on the alleged date of payment of Rs. 25 lacs. He returned a sum of Rs.12,50,000/- to the complainant in two installments. From the locations of the towers, it also emerges that the complainant, alleged conduit Budh Singh and the petitioner were on the same locations on the alleged date of payment of Rs. 25 lacs. He returned a sum of Rs.12,50,000/- to the complainant in two installments. The conduct of the complainant and the antecedents of his friend Rakesh Gupta indicate that they are persons of doubtful integrity. However, there is specific allegation that an amount of Rs.25 lacs was paid to the petitioner and connectivity of the complainant with the petitioner and his conduit Budh Singh is duly established from the phone calls details collected by the investigating agency. Moreover, the investigation is still in progress. From the statement of the complainant as well as the phone calls records, prima facie, involvement of the petitioner in the commission of crime is made out and if he is granted the concession of pre-arrest bail, he being a senior police officer, can influence the investigating agency. Therefore, the present petition for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner is dismissed. 5. However, this should not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. ---------0.B.S.0------------