IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
MANJIT SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB – Respondent
company. Complainant further stated that he opened his office at 9 a.m. and closed it at 8 p.m. After checking the locks, he leaves for his house. On 25.01.2003, he closed his office and went to his house. It was holiday on 26.01.2003. When he opened his office on 27.01.2003, he found that the almirah was found broken and Rs.50,000/- had been stolen by someone. He inquired from all the persons and found that Manjit Singh petitioner was absent. Complainant had firm belief that the amount had been stolen by Manjit Singh. ASI Ram Murti recorded the statement of complainant and read over the same to him and he signed the same in token of its correctness. ASI made his endorsement on it and sent it to the police station where on its basis, a formal FIR Ex.PA/2 was registered against the accused. ASI Ram Murti went to the spot and prepared the rough site plan Ex.PB with correct marginal notes. He recorded the statements of PWs and arrested the accused vide memo Ex.PG. Personal search memo Ex.PF of the accused was also prepared.
3. After the registration of the FIR, the petitioner was arrested, and on his disclosure statement Ex. PC, the police party went to the disclosed place and recovere
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.