BAKHTAWAR SINGH @ TARI Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been filed under Section 439, Code of Criminal Procedure, for grant of bail in F.I.R. No. 62. registered at P.S.Adampur, under Sections 3 and 4 of Indian Official Secrets Act read with Section 120-B, Indian Penal Code.

(2.) PETITIONER -Bakhtawar Singh @ Tari son of Amar Singh, is resident of 32, West Drive Hanshworth Birmingham, England (U.K.) and a British Citizen. His native village is Khandola Kalan, District Jalandhar. His father migrated to England about 40-50 years ago and is residing there since then. According to the petitioner, he along with his two friends namely Gurdish Singh and Jeffrey Edwards, visited India and was staying in International Hotel, Jalandhar, when they were arrested by the Police and were kept in illegal custody in Jalandhar for few days. Thereafter, the friends of the petitioner were released by the police and the petitioner was handed over to the police of P.S. Adamour, Jalandhar, to get him implicated in some false case as the petitioner had threatened that he will not only highlight his and his friends' detention by the police, but shall also raise this issue in International Forum. Further, according to the petitioner, he is in custody since 4th July, 1994, on the basis of F.I.R. No. 62, dated 6.7.1994. The true translation of the said F.I.R. is reproduced hereunder:-

(3.) I was shown negatives and photographs by the Hon'ble Court and on examination of the same, I found that these could not be taken from the camera which I had examined, namely, Nishika 3-D. To the best of my knowledge and experience as a photographer who has been in the trade for the last 34 years. I am of the opinion that these photographs were taken with a regular 35 mm SLR (Single Lens Reflex) camera and in order to take these photographs, additional lenses had been used, such as telephoto, normal as well as wide angle lenses. There is no provision in the Nishika 3-D camera or in any other similar kind of Cameras in the world to inter-change the lenses. Nishika 3-D is not a S.L.R. Accordingly to my considered opinion, the photographs shown by the Hon'ble Court to me could not possibly have been taken with the Nishika 3-D camera. For ready reference by way of example, I am enclosing one negative along with one contact print of the same to highlight the fact that four frames constitute one negative which becomes the master negative from which one photograph is printed." Counsel for the State has fairly conceded that the photographs which were got developed on the asking of Addl. Sessions Judge, have not been taken from the camera recovered from the petitioner. However, he submitted that even if it is taken that the photographs were not taken from this camera, but still the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of bail because a map of Jalandhar City was also recovered on the basis of disclosure statement made on 8.7.1994.