Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Lisa Gill, J.
Simarjeet Singh Bains & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State Of Punjab & Anr. – Respondents
CRM-M No.53680 of 2021(O&M) with CRM-M No.21404 of 2022(O&M) with CRM-M No.19481 of 2022(O&M) with CRM-M No.19485 of 2022(O&M) with CRM-M No.19489 of 2022(O&M) with CRM-M No.21258 of 2022(O&M) with CRM-M No.21259 of 2022(O&M) with CRM-M No.21262 of 2022(O&M) with CRM-M No.21264 of 2022(O&M) with CRM-M No.52672 of 2021(O&M)
Decided On : 10-06-2022
Accused No.1 - Criminal Proceedings - Sections 376, 354, 354A, 506, 120B IPC - The court dismissed the petitions filed by the accused, including Accused No.1, seeking quashing of orders and anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No.180 dated 10.07.2021. The court also directed the accused to appear before the trial court within one week of receipt of the order for expeditious decision on their bail applications.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved allegations of sexual exploitation and harassment against seven accused persons, including Accused No.1, who was a Member of Legislative Assembly in the State of Punjab and the President of a political party. The complainant alleged that she was subjected to forceful acts and exploitation by the accused, leading to the registration of FIR No.180 dated 10.07.2021 under Sections 376, 354, 354A, 506, 120B IPC.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the accused, including Accused No.1, had evaded the process of law and attempted to avoid arrest. The court also noted the clout and influence wielded by Accused No.1, which had hindered the police authorities from taking unbiased and judicious action. The court observed that the accused did not deserve any indulgence from the court due to their blatant disregard for the legal process.
Issues: The main issues revolved around the evasion of the legal process by the accused, the influence of Accused No.1, and the allegations of sexual exploitation and harassment against the accused.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the accused, including Accused No.1, were not entitled to any relief as they had knowingly evaded the legal process and attempted to avoid arrest. The court also emphasized that the influence of Accused No.1 had hindered the police authorities from taking unbiased action, reflecting a misuse of power and influence.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the petitions filed by the accused and directed them to appear before the trial court within one week for expeditious decision on their bail applications.
JUDGMENT
Lisa Gill, J. - This order shall dispose of CRM-M No.53680 of 2021, CRM-M Nos.21404, 19481,19485,19489, 21258, 21259,21262 and 21264 of 2022 as well as CRM-M No.52672 of 2021. At request and with consent of learned counsel for the parties, all these petitions have been taken up together for hearing and decision as the same are intrinsically interlinked with each other arising out of FIR No.180 dated 10.07.2021, under Sections 376, 354, 354A, 506, 120B IPC, Police Station Division No.6, Ludhiana.
2. It is relevant to note that FIR No.180 dated 10.07.2021 was registered on a petition under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. filed by the complainant.
3. Prayer in the said petition was for registration of FIR against seven (7) accused persons, namely, Simarjeet Singh Bains, Karamjeet Singh, Baljinder Kaur, Jasbir Kaur, Sukhchain Singh, Paramjit Singh, and Pardeep Kumar @ Gogi Sharma.
4. As per allegations in the abovesaid FIR, Simarjeet Singh Bains (hereinafter referred to as 'Accused No.1') is a Member of Legislative Assembly in the State of Punjab as was his other brother, namely, Balwinder Singh Bains.
5. Further, Accused No.1 is stated to be President of one political party, namely Lok Insaaf Party. Sukhchain Singh (hereinafter referred to as 'Accused No.5') is stated to have helped the complainant to purchase a house in January, 2018 for a sum of Rs.18,00,000/-, out of which Rs. 11,00,000/- was paid in cash by the complainant. Rs. 10,00,000/- were secured from Vijaya Bank through Accused No.5. Sale-deed was executed on 09.03.2018 after the loan was approved. It is alleged that Accused No.5 misappropriated a sum of Rs. 1,25,000/- as expenses for securing the loan. It is further stated that Accused No.5 arranged one election meeting for Accused No.1 at his residence on 26.04.2019 and on being invited, the complainant too attended the said meeting. Accused No.1 is stated to have called the complainant a number of times on the pretext of availing some telephone facilities as the complainant was working with 'Connect', a telephone company. Complainant's husband died on 01.02.2018 and her family's economic condition, it is stated, was weak and she defaulted in repayment of the loan installments. Bank staff is stated to have visited complainant's work place in the last week of June, 2019 and threatened to dispossess the complainant from the house. In August, 2018 when the bank was pressurizing the complainant, she is stated to have approached Accused No.1 for help, who informed the complainant that the broker, dealer and bank staff are all hand in glove with each other. Accused No.5, it is further stated, offered to pay Rs. 4,50,000/- and one plot of 60 square yards in Jassowal as he did not have ready money. It is stated that complainant was advised by Accused No.1 to accept the offer being genuine.
6. However, the complainant not wishing to build a house at Jassowal did not wish to accept the said offer, on which Accused No.5 did not come out with any viable solution except to say that she should take the plot and after sale of the same, the money would be handed over to her. Accused No.1, Simarjeet Singh Bains is stated to have asked the complainant to trust the dealer, Accused No.5 and in case of any subsequent problem, he would sort out the same. Complainant while reposing faith in Accused No.1 agreed to the same. Pursuant thereto, Accused No.5 took possession of the property from the complainant in the month of November, 2019 and procured one house on rent for her at the rate of Rs. 5,000/- per month. Power of attorney was taken from the complainant in favour of accused No.5 on 13.09.2019 and he paid Rs. 10,000/-. Thereafter a sum of Rs. 4,40,000/- was paid by him. Complainant asked to sell the plot at Jassowal and release the payment to her, but the Accused No.5 kept putting of the matter.
7. After the lockdown in the last week of March, 2020, financial position of the complainant is stated to have became very weak and she approac
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the accused, especially Accused No.1, cannot evade the legal process and avoid arrest, and their influence should not hinder unbiased and judi....
The court established that a person declared as a Proclaimed Offender under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is not entitled to anticipatory bail.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
