KALI Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has approached this Court, by way of instant petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C., seeking pre-arrest bail in the case arising out of FIR No. 96 dated 26.5.2011, under Sections 420, 328, 379 IPC, registered at Police Station City Khanna, District Ludhiana.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that in compliance of the orders dated 8.6.2012 and 2.8.2012, the petitioner has joined the investigation twice. He further submits that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required because nothing is to be recovered from her. Thus, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that instant petition deserves to be accepted.

(3.) Per contra, learned counsel for the State, on instructions from SI Gurdev Singh, Police Station City Khanna, District Ludhiana, submits that it is correct that petitioner has joined the investigation twice, but she has not cooperated with the investigating agency in getting the recovery effected. She further submits that during the investigation, it has been found that petitioner has received Rs. 25,000/- as share of booty. Since petitioner was having the interim protection, vide orders dated 8.6.2012 and 2.8.2012 passed by this Court, she intentionally did not cooperate with the investigating agency in getting the recovery effected. Learned counsel for the State further contends that in view of the non cooperative attitude of the petitioner, she is not entitled for the benefit of pre-arrest bail.