PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
Anoop Chitkara, J.
Malvinder Singh Sidhu – Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab – Respondent
CRM-M-9310-2024
Decided on : 15-03-2024
JUDGMENT :
Anoop Chitkara, J.
FIR No. | Dated | Police Station | Sections |
28 | 30.10.2023 | Vigilance Bureau, FS-1, Punjab at Mohali | 7, 7A of PC (Amendment) Act, 2018 and 384, 419, 420, 120-B IPC (Section 201 IPC added later on) |
1. The petitioner, who was posted as AIG, after arrest, is in custody from 04.11.2023, in the FIR captioned above, has come up before this Court under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) seeking bail.
2. In paragraph 21 of the bail application, the accused declares the following criminal
antecedent:
Sr. No. | FIR No. | Date | Offences | Police Station |
1. | 117 | 25.10.2023 | 353 and 186 IPC | Phase-VIII, SAS Nagar (Mohali) |
2. | 7 | 27.01.2024 | 384, 120-B IPC | Phase-8, SAS Nagar, Mohali |
3. Petitioner's counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent conditions and are also voluntarily agreeable to the condition that till the conclusion of the trial, the petitioner shall keep only one mobile number, which is mentioned in AADHAR card, if any, and within fifteen days undertakes to disconnect all other mobile numbers. The petitioner contends that the further pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and family.
4. The state's counsel opposes the bail and states that considering the allegations, the petitioner is not entitled to any bail. The State's counsel further contends that given the criminal past, the accused is likely to indulge in crime again once released on bail.
5. Facts of the case are being taken from status report dated 04.03.2024 filed by concerned DySP which reads as under:-
"2. That at the initial stage a Source Report No. 37627 dated 06.09.2023 was received by the Vigilance Bureau, SAS Nagar, Mohali and on the basis of the same an Enquiry No. 15 dated 06.09.2023 was initiated by the Flying Squad-1, Vigilance Bureau. That as per the allegations in the source report it was alleged that 1) Malvinder Singh Sidhu (the present Petitioner) 2) Kuldeep Singh, 3) Balbir Singh, in connivance with each other are procuring Schedule Caste/Schedule Tribe certificate(s) of various individuals, from different sources like their School, Work Place etc. That further, on the basis of this they are illegally, unlawfully extracting/asking for money from these innocent individuals by blackmailing them after misusing their position/official posts.
That on the other hand there were allegations against the petitioner that he has misused his official position and has brought/made assets which are more than his income. Thus, on such serious allegations, the Enquiry No. 15 was initiated and the same was marked to the then Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance Bureau, Flying Squad-1, Punjab, Sh. Barinder Singh Gill.
3. That during the course of Enquiry No. 15, the Petitioner as well as the other individuals were summoned and were directed to appear before the Enquiry Officer i.e. Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance Bureau, Flying Squad-1, Punjab. That the Petitioner chose to appear at the initial stage as per his own convenience and conditions. That ultimately when he appeared before the Enquiry Officer on 25.10.2023, then he misbehaved during the enquiry and obstructed the officials from performing their duty and thus FIR No. 117 dated 25.10.2023 under Section 353 and 186 IPC, Police Station Phase VIII, SAS Nagar, Mohali was registered against the present Petitioner.
That on the other hand the other individuals namely Kuldeep Singh, Balbir Singh were also summoned simultaneously however, they chose not appear during the course of enquiry.
5. ROLE AND CONDUCT OF PETITIONER:-
a. That during the Vigilance Enquiry Sh. Malvinder Singh, AIG, Human Rights, Punjab, Chandigarh was called by way of summon(s) having no.2552 dated 26.09.2023, thus he came on 29.09.2023 before the inquiry officer and submitted his written submissions to which he requested to be treated as his statement. However, the said written submissions were totally vague, irrelevant and without any basis due to which the same could not be accepted. Therefo
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.
Anticipatory bail can be granted even after prior custody if custodial interrogation is not justified, balancing individual rights with the necessity of a fair trial.
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.