ARVIND KUMAR THAKUR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These four petitions under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. are filed seeking regular bail in FIR No. 410 dtd. 28/10/2020 under Ss. 420, 421, 466, 467, 468, 471, 167, 120-B IPC, Sec. 12 of Passports Act, 1967 and Ss. 7, 8, 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, registered at Police Station Zirakpur, District SAS Nagar.

(2.) The initiation point for registering the FIR was an information received from Community Policing SAS Nagar. The information was that verification of antecedents of Sarabjit Singh was not done properly by Passport Verification Officer-Constable Rajinder Singh (petitioner in CRM- M-1185 of 2021). The applicant was not found residing on the address given in the application, his Aadhaar card and Matriculation certificate were found fake. Further, it was found that one Gurbir Singh had applied for passport by changing his name as Raj Kumar @ Raju. Similar were the allegations against Sandeep (real name Ashish). Sarabjit Singh, Gurbir Singh (real name Raju @ Raj Kumar) and Constable Rajinder Singh were named in the FIR. During investigation, Constable Rajinder Singh was arrested on 29/10/2020. He made disclosure of verification of 41 fake passports. He named Constable Sukhwant Singh (petitioner in CRM-M- 20814 of 2021). Sukhwant Singh was arrested on 2/11/2020, he disclosed name of Raman Kumar and stated that he used to provide the details of persons who had applied for passports on basis of fake documents and verification of their antecedents was to be done. Raman Kumar on arrest named Arvind Kumar Thakur (petitioner in CRM-M-11057 of 2021) and Gurminder Singh. Arvind Kumar Thakur was arrested on 2/12/2020. The role attributed to him was that he acted as a link between the customers and the persons who had to arrange fake passports. Kulwinder Singh was nominated as an accused on 17/3/2021 and was arrested. He was the person who applied for a passport through Arvind Kumar Thakur by giving his address of Zirakpur whereas he was resident of District Bathinda. The reason for doing so was that he was involved in an NDPS Act case.

(3.) It would be appropriate to note that challans against all the petitioners have been presented, though the charges are yet to be framed.