DALWINDER SINGH @ VICKY Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition under Section 438 Cr. P.C., petitioner has sought pre-arrest bail in a case registered against him under Sections 420, 473 and 379 IPC at Police Station Sudhar, Ludhiana Rural, District Ludhiana, vide FIR No. 90 dated 7th August, 2009.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. There is no evidence to connect him with the crime. He, thus, deserves the concession of pre-arrest bail.

(3.) Learned State counsel has, however, opposed the prayer. He (on instructions from Head Constable Nirmal Singh, who is present in court) submits that in fact the petitioner stole the vehicle and sold the same to Gurnam Singh. According to him, there are six other cases of similar nature registered against the petitioner. His custodial interrogation is required for unraveling the modus operandi of the crime.