Back
RAJESH BHARDWAJ
Simranjeet Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts of the case detailing the fir. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments of both parties regarding bail. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court observations regarding allegations and need for interrogation. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. legal standards for granting anticipatory bail. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 5. conclusion denying anticipatory bail. (Para 11) |
JUDGMENT
Rajesh Bhardwaj, J.
The petitioners have approached this Court praying for grant of anticipatory bail to them in a case FIR No.39, dated 21.03.2023 registered under Sections 406 , 420 and 120B IPC and Section 13 of Punjab Travel Professionals Regulations Act, 2012, at Police Station Kotwali, Nabha, District Patiala.
2. As per facts of the case, the FIR was registered on the statement of complainant, namely, Deepak Kamra son of Bisandas Singh. It was alleged that the complainant is the owner of Deepak Hotel and Restaurant. One Amandeep Singh used to do the work of making combine for a long time in the name of M/s Carbro Agro Tech and had relationship with the complainant. Younger son of the complainant, namely, Sahil Kamra aged about 29/30 years had been working with him. Amandeep Singh came to his hotel about 7 months ago with his brother Simran Singh an
The absence of evidence implicating the petitioner as a travel agent and the lack of grounds to deny bail based on the recovery of the amount in question were crucial in granting anticipatory bail.
Custodial interrogation is essential for effective investigation in serious financial offences, particularly where the accused is a primary participant. Granting pre-arrest protection in such cases w....
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
