LAKHVIR SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been filed under Section 438 Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.51 dated 03.04.2018 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 364 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short- IPC ) and 25 of Arms Act , at Police Station City Muktsar.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that allegations against the petitioner have been levelled at the behest of local MLA, who wanted to prevent the petitioner from participating in the tender process fixed for 03.04.2018. The allegations against the petitioner are that he along with his associates had kidnapped the complainant in their car and then dropped him at some distance. The version in the FIR is not at all probable. In case, the petitioner had to kidnap the complainant, he had not released him after some distance. This version of the complainant that he was kidnapped to prevent him from appearing as witness in case FIR dated 26.10.2015 registered at Police Station Gidderbaha for the offences punishable under Sections 307 , 325 , 295-A , 336 , 148 , 149 IPC is also false as the complainant had not appeared as witness in that case. This Court vide order dated 25.10.2018 has directed the trial Court to ensure his presence as witness.

(3.) Learned State counsel has argued that in the earlier case registered against the petitioner, complainant had to appear as witness on 06.04.2018. Due to this reason, he was kidnapped on 03.04.2018. The petitioner and his associates had tried to kidnap the complainant at Muktsar in their car but could not succeed as their act of kidnapping was witnessed and some people followed them. All the locations of the petitioner as per the allegations in the FIR are duly proved from their call details. The incident had taken place at Muktsar while the local M.L.A. alleged to be involved in the case is stated to be of Gidderbaha. On 03.04.2018, petitioner had even gone to the office of DFSC, Sri Muktsar Sahib and shown him pistol and he had also made a report to Deputy Commissioner, Sri Muktsar Sahib. The petitioner has joined the investigation and the weapon used for the offence and the car have since been recovered from his possession but his custodial interrogation is still required for the arrest of the other occupants of the car and pre-arrest bail in such a heinous crime will convey a wrong signal to the society.