PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
Anoop Chitkara, J.
Surjit Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana – Respondent
CRM-M No. 2250-2024
Decided on : 20-02-2024
JUDGMENT :
Anoop Chitkara, J.
FIR No. | Dated | Police Station | Sections |
360 | 20.08.2020 | City Tohana, Distt. Fatehabad | 420, 467, 468, 471, 474, 198, 201, 120-B IPC and Section 12(1)(b of Passport Act 1967 and Sections 7, 8, 12 of Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 and Sections 66-C & 66-D of Information Technology Act 2000 |
1. The petitioner, incarcerated around 10 months in the FIR captioned above, has come up before this Court under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) seeking bail.
2. As per paragraph 4(iv) of the bail petition as well as custody certificate dated 08.02.2024, the accused has the following criminal antecedents:
Sr. No. | FIR No. | Date | Offences | Police Station |
1 | 308 | 23.09.2020 | 21 of NDPS Act | Goindwal Sahib, Tarn Taran |
2 | 16 | 01.03.2021 | 15, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 27, 27-A, 28 & 30 of NDPS Act | Chohla Sahib, Tarn Taran |
3 | 109 | 03.09.2022 | 15, 18, 21, 22, 29 of NDPS Act 1985, Sections 25(6), 25(7)(i), 4/5 of Explosive Substances Act u/s 10, 11, 12 Air Craft Act and 304 IPC | Chohla Saheb, Tarn Taran |
4 | 64 | 05.04.2022 | 21C, 25, 29 of NDPS Act 1985 | STF, SAS Nagar, Mohali |
5 | 37 | 25.02.2023 | 21, 29 of NDPS Act and 25 of Arms Act | Sadar Tarn Taran, Punjab |
6 | 210 | 18.04.2020 | 420, 467, 468, 471, 474, 201, 120-B, IPC, 12(1)B Passport Act, Sections 7, 8, 12 of PC Act and 66C & 66D of IT Act 2000 | City Tohana |
3. Prosecutions case is being taken from reply dated 13.02.2024, filed by the concerned DySP, which reads as under:-
"3. That briefly stated facts of the case are that the present case was registered on the complaint of Inspector Jagjit Singh, Incharge Security, Fatehabad with the averments that on 21.7.2020, three passport applications form (1) Sandeep Kumar son of Sanjeev Kumar, resident of House No. 245, Ward No. 5, Prem Nagar, Near Kutia, Tohana (2) Harpreet Singh son of Ranjit Singh, resident of House No. 270, Ward no. 5, Prem Nagar, Near Kutia, Tohana and (3) Karamvir Singh son of Nirmal Singh, resident of House No. 256, Ward No. 5, Prem Nagar, Near Kutia, Tohana containing same mobile No. 75289-83071 were received in his office. On having suspicion, efforts were made to contact on the said mobile number, but the same was found to be switched off. On verification by S.H.O. Police Station, City Tohana, it revealed that the applicants mentioned in the said passport applications were not found residing at the given addresses. During enquiry, two other application forms were also found containing the same mobile No. 75289-83071 whereas 24 passport application forms were also found containing mobile No. 7889278084. On enquiry, the passport applicants were not found residing at the given addresses. Upon the said complaint, above-mentioned F.I.R. was registered and Special Investigating Team was constituted.
4. That during the course of investigation, SIT collected relevant record from the concerned quarters. On verification of the attached identity proofs of the passport applicants, it transpired that all the IDs annexed with the passport application forms were fake and forged. In one of the application forms, photocopy of driving license of one Anil Bhatia was annexed and his mobile number 94161-65312 was endorsed on the passport application. During investigation, it transpired that as many as 23 passports had been delivered to Anil Bhatia through Rajwinder Singh, Postman, Post Office, Tohana. So, Anil Bhatia was joined in the investigation of this case on 04.09.2020 and his complicity in getting prepared the passports after using fake identity proofs surfaced. Upon interrogation, accused Anil Bhatia suffered his disclosure statement to the effect that he had been doing the work of agent for providing passport services and came in contact with petitioner Surjit Singh and hatched conspiracy for making forged passports with the petitioner. Consequent upon the disclosure statement of co-accused Anil Bhatia, co-accused Monu Sachdeva was arrested and interrogated. During interrogation, coaccused Monu Sachdeva suffered disclosure statement to the effect that he had been a traveler
The court established that bail should be granted unless there are compelling reasons to deny it, emphasizing the need for a fair trial and the protection of the accused's rights.
The court emphasized that bail conditions under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act must balance the liberty of the accused with the necessity of a fair trial, allowing bail given the minor financ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.