Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 579 (PNJ)

Sahil Kumar Goyal (Dr. ) v. State of Punjab

2022-03-30

AVNEESH JHINGAN

body2022
Judgment Mr. Avneesh Jhingan, J. This petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is filed seeking regular bail in case of FIR No.8 dated 16.6.2020, under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, 1860 and under Sections 7, 13(1)(a) and 8 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, registered at Police Station Vigilance Bureau, District Bathinda. 2. As per the allegations, the accused were preparing fake Disability Certificates and Dope test report. It was further alleged that the accused were coordinating with private hospital and receiving bribe for referring the patients from the Civil Hospital to the Private Hospital for treatment. 3. The role attributed to the petitioner is that he was actively participating in preparing false MLR and forging Dope test reports. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 8.7.2021 and investigation is complete. The petitioner was on probation and the main accused is the SMO. He was obeying the orders of his seniors. Petitioner is not involved in any other case. He relies upon the fact that co-accused were granted bail. 5. Learned State counsel on instructions form SI Kuldeep Singh opposes the prayer and submits that the petitioner was declared proclaimed offender on 27.1.2021 and he surrendered on 8.7.2021. It is further argued that the specimen signatures and voice sample are to be collected. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner himself surrendered before the trial Court. Petitioner is ready to give his voice sample and specimen signatures. 7. Without commenting upon the merits of the case, considering that the case is prima-facie based upon the documentary evidence, investigation is complete, the petitioner volunteers to give his voice sample and specimen signatures, he is not having any criminal antecedents, bail is granted to the petitioner on furnishing surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned. 8. The petition is allowed. It is clarified that the observations made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.