INTZAR Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed the present petition for seeking the pre-arrest bail. It has been asserted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in FIR No.80 of 2023 for the commission of offence punishable under Sec. 379 of IPC dtd. 29/7/2023 and FIR No.99 of 2023 for the commission of offences punishable under Ss. 379, 411, 201 and 34 of IPC dtd. 30/9/2023 registered at Police Station, Talai, District Bilaspur, H.P.

(2.) The FIR was registered against the petitioner at Police Station, Talai on 29/7/2023 asserting that the informant received a call from the call centre of the company that the site was down so he visited the spot and found that three Remote Radio Units (RRU) were missing from the tower.

(3.) Another FIR No.99 of 2023 was registered by Mr. Kulwinder stating that the tower located at Jhabola was down. He visited the spot and found three RRUs were missing. The petitioner was nowhere mentioned in the FIR No.80 of 2023 and his name was mentioned in the disclosure statement made by the main accused. The petitioner was arrested on 28/9/2023 and his name was added in FIR No.99 of 2023. The petitioner has been falsely implicated in FIR No.99 of 2023 as he was under police custody at the time of the registration of the FIR. The petitioner is a scrap dealer and the main accused had sold the stolen goods to him. The petitioner could not know that the goods being sold to him were stolen; therefore, the present petition was filed for seeking the pre-arrest bail.