ANMOL KASRIJA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner in this case sought anticipatory bail after FIR No. 102 dated 17.06.2014 had been registered against him and his two coaccused, i.e. one Raj Kumar and Rajesh Kumar, all three of whom are partners running a firm which runs a rice sheller.

(2.) The allegations in the FIR is that total 59092 bags of 'A' Class paddy, weighing 20682 quintals, were given to the firm for milling rice therefrom, in the year 2011-2012, but the rice supplied after milling is only to the tune of 7255.71 quintals, thereby making a shortfall of 6601.36 quintals, as actually 13857.07 quintals of rice was to be delivered after giving a leeway of 33% as wastage/damage etc. Vide order dated 27.08.2014, this Court had admitted the petitioner to interim 'anticipatory' bail, directing him to join investigation and submit all documents as were required, to account for the missing paddy/rice.

(3.) Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from the police official present in Court to assist him, submits that though the petitioner did not come himself, he sent certain documents through his father, which, as per his instructions from both, the police official as also an officer from the Punjab State Civil Suplies Corporation (PUNSUP), was simply the agreement signed between the petitioner and PUNSUP, and some other documents which nowhere account for the manner in which the paddy/rice which is short, was utilized or accounted for. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner also went with his father, but was not sought to be arrested and as such there was no occasion for him to furnish any bail bonds/surety bonds, either before the Arresting Officer or before the Ilaqa Magistrate.