Karamjit Singh @ Karamjeet Singh vs State Of Punjab

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(P&H) 144

ANOOP CHITKARA
Karamjit Singh @ Karamjeet Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. K.B.S. Mann, Advocate, for the Appellant; Mr. H.S. Sitta, AAG, Punjab, for the Respondent

JUDGMENT

Anoop Chitkara, J.

FIR No.	Dated	Police Station	Section
81	10.06.2022	Sangat, District Bathinda	21 (1) of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957.

1. The petitioner apprehending arrest in the FIR captioned above has come up before this Court under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail.

2. In paragraph 9 of the bail petition, the accused declares that he has no criminal antecedents.

3. The allegations pertain to illegal mining and transporting the minerals without authority, permit, or licence.

4. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner contends that the custodial investigation would serve no purpose whatsoever, and the pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and family.

5. Ld. counsel representing the State opposes bail.

REASONING:

6. The petitioner is a first offender, and one of the relevant factors would be to provide an opportunity to course-correct.

7. In the present case, the maximum sentence imposable for the offences mentioned in FIR does not exceed seven years. Thus, directions passed in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273, (Para 13), apply to this petition, wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court directed all the State G