SUKHJINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner seeks pre - arrest bail in a case registered against him on 27.11.2007 for the offences under Sections 420 and 120-B Indian Penal Code.

(2.) The FIR has been registered on the basis of report submitted by Karam Chand, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub Division Pathankot dated 19.9.2007. In terms of the report, verification was sought from the office of Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub Division, Pathankot with respect to various candidates. Verification was sought as regards Baljinder Singh son of Lakha Singh or Mehtab Singh son of Lakha Singh. In the inquiry, it was verified by Sarpanch of the Village, Joginder, Member Panchayat, Ajit Singh, Member Panchayat, Harbans Lal, Samiti Member, Basant Singh and Saje Singh that in the certificate Baljinder Singh is mentioned as Baljinder Singh whereas in the locality he is known by the name of Mehtab Singh. The verification of Baljinder Singh alias Mehtab Singh son of Lakha Singh has been found correct. The report regarding Baljinder Singh and Sukhjinder Singh (petitioner) sons of Lakha Singh was obtained from the Civil Surgeon, Civil Hospital, Gurdaspur and also from the record for the years 1986 and 1988 of Village Chhit, Police Station Sadar, Batala. As per the record, the date of birth of Baljinder Singh was 24.12.1988 and that of Sukhjinder Singh (petitioner) was recorded as 14.8.1986. The Principal, Government Senior Secondary School, Khojki Chak had verified that Baljinder Singh had got admission in the 9th Class and roll number was issued by the Punjab School Education Board. He passed the Matriculation examination in March 2004. As per voter card it is mentioned as Baljinder Singh son of Lakha Singh whereas as per Police Station Register 9-II, case FIR No.54 dated 11.12.2004 for the offences under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 427 Indian Penal Code; besides, case FIR No.56 dated 19.12.2004 for the offences under Sections 325, 323 and 34 Indian Penal Code stands registered at Police Station Narot Jaimal Singh. These cases are registered against Mehtab Singh son of Lakha Singh and his brother Sukhjinder Singh (petitioner) whose name has been mentioned as Sukha Singh son of Lakha Singh in case FIR No.54 dated 11.12.2004 and in case FIR No.56 dated 19.12.2004 the name of Sukhjinder Singh (petitioner) is mentioned as Sukhdev Singh son of Lakha Singh. In both the said cases i.e. FIR No.54 dated 11.12.2004 and FIR No.56 dated 19.12.2004 the original names of both these accused were not mentioned. There was only one person by the name of Lakha Singh son of Darbara Singh and there were six family members of said Lakha Singh son of Darbara Singh which include Sukhjinder Singh alias Sukha Singh alias Sukhdev Singh (petitioner) and Baljinder Singh alias Mehtab Singh. It was observed that two cases were registered against Mehtab Singh son of Lakha Singh i.e. FIR No.54 dated 11.12.2004 and FIR No.56 dated 19.12.2004. Besides, two cases were registered against his brother Sukhjinder Singh alias Sukha Singh alias Sukhdev Singh (petitioner) i.e. FIR No.54 of 2004 and FIR No.56 of 2004. Case FIR No.56 of 2004 for the offences under Sections 323, 325 and 34 Indian Penal Code and case FIR No.204 of 2004 for the offences under Sections 302 and 34 Indian Penal Code; besides, Sec. 25 of the Arms Act at Police Station Sadar, Batala and FIR No.54 of 2004 and FIR No.56 of 2004 as also FIR No.13 of 2005 for the offences under Sections 379, 447, 511 and 506 Indian Penal Code were registered at Police Station Narot Jaimal Singh against Lakha Singh son of Darbara Singh. Lakha Singh was a highly doubtful person of Police Station Narot Jaimal Singh and his dossier had been prepared. As per verification the antecedent of Baljinder Singh son of Lakha Singh were carried out. It was verified that Lakha Singh had got verification of his son in the name of Baljinder Singh son of Lakha Singh by respectable persons of the village by taking them into confidence and the cases registered in the Police Station were in the names of his sons Mehtab Singh and Sukhjinder Singh alias Sukha Singh. At the time of verification, Lakha Singh did not mention the nick-names of the names of his sons by which they were called in the village. The verification had been got done by Subhash Chander, In-charge, Police Post Bamial by committing fraud on the basis of which Munshi of Police Station Narot Jaimal Singh perused and inquired with regard to the record of Baljinder Singh son of Lakha Singh but no case was registered by such name due to which Munshi gave a positive report. During the inquiry, it was found that had Lakha Singh written the name of his son Baljinder Singh as Baljinder Singh alias Mehtab Singh then at the time of submitting inquiry report the cases would have been mentioned. By doing so Lakha Singh son of Darbara Singh and both his sons Baljinder Singh alias Mehtab Singh and Sukhjinder Singh alias Sukha Singh as well as respectable persons of the village who got the verification done, it was opined, had not mentioned and verified their nick-names. Therefore, they made wrong verification and kept the Police in doubt. Lakha Singh son of Darbara Singh and his son who had got verification from the respectables of the village, it was observed that legal opinion be sought in this regard and recommendation be made for registering the case against them. The case accordingly was registered against the petitioner.

(3.) The petitioner Sukhjinder Singh filed criminal Misc. No.M- 55187 of 2007 for grant of anticipatory bail. This Court vide order dated 8.1.2008 disposed of the said application. Learned Deputy Advocate General stated at the bar that the petitioner had joined the investigation as ordered by this Court on 27.12.2007. It was submitted that he was no more required by the Police for further investigation. The interim order dated 27.12.2007 was accordingly made absolute which order it was ordered shall remain in force for a period of thirty days from 8.1.2008 to enable the petitioner to move the Court concerned for regular bail. The petitioner filed an application for regular bail in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Pathankot which was dismissed vide order dated 28.1.2008. However, the petitioner was not taken into custody as in terms of the order dated 8.1.2008 passed by this Court the interim order was to remain in force for a period of 30 days from 8.1.2008. The petitioner then filed an application for the grant of regular bail before the Sessions Court which was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur vide order dated 6.2.2008 (Annexure-P.7). It was observed that the petitioner Sukhjinder Singh with his brother Baljinder Singh were facing trial in cases FIR No.54 and FIR No.56 of 2004. The petitioner and Baljinder Singh were acquitted in FIR No.56 of 2004 as the matter had been compromised. During the pendency of the application, Baljinder Singh had been able to secure job in the Army and Sukhjinder Singh (petitioner) had secured a job as a Teacher. It was observed that it has surfaced during inquiry that Police verified on the request moved so far by the concerned Defence department that the accused had been facing trial and they had misrepresented and had been able to secure jobs one in the Army and the other (petitioner) as Teacher. It was observed that this implied that the accused Baljinder Singh and Sukhjinder Singh (petitioner) had not informed their respective employers that they were involved in criminal cases because they were appearing in the criminal cases under different names. Sukhjinder Singh (petitioner) was appearing as Sukhdev Singh alias Sukha Singh and Baljinder Singh was appearing as Mehtab Singh both sons of Lakha Singh. Therefore, the persons who were defrauding the State and had been playing with the statutory authorities to scuttle the law, it was held, were not entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application of the petitioner Sukhjinder Singh as also Baljinder Singh was dismissed. After dismissal of the bail application by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur vide order dated 6.2.2008 (Annexure-P.7) the petitioner has not appeared before the trial Court.