CRM-M-27192-2017 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH.
Crl. Misc. No.M-27192 of 2017 (OM)
Date of Decision: December 12, 2017
Pentu Singh
……PETITIONER(s).
VERSUS
State of Punjab
….RESPONDENT(s).
CORAM:- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA
Present: Mr. Baltej Singh Sidhu, Advocate
for the petitioner (s).
Ms. Seena Mand, DAG, Punjab.
*******
SURINDER GUPTA, J.(Oral)
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 31.05.2017 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 341, 506, 427, 379, 148 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal
Code; 25, 27 of Arms Act; 25-C of the Telegraph Wires (Unlawful
Possession) Act, 1950 and 10 of Essential Services Maintenance Act, 1981
at Police Station Mehna , District Moga.
Heard.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the company has
got registered 13 more FIRs against other employees of the company at
various places is an attempt to get rid of its employees, who were working
with it at the salary of around `15,000/- per month, to replace them with
1 of 3
::: Downloaded on – 15-12-2017 22:49:41 :::
CRM-M-27192-2017 -2-
employee at lesser salary.
Learned State counsel on instructions from ASI Pritam Singh
submits that the petitioner who was contractual employee of complainant
has joined the investigation. However, the investigating officer is not aware
whether the company has got registered 13 more FIRs against the other
employees as alleged by the petitioner. She further submits that custodial
interrogation of petitioner is required to recover of pistol which was pointed
towards the complainant at the time of incident.
Admittedly, petitioner was an employee of company of
complainant on the day of incident. Investigating officer has not taken any
termination order of service of the petitioner on record. Version of
petitioner that this FIR is an attempt to get rid of him by complainant
company which has got recorded several other such FIRs against its other
employees, as well, is to be looked into during investigation.
Keeping in view of above facts but without expressing any
opinion on the merits of the case, this petition is allowed and the order dated
28.07.2017 is made absolute till the presentation of challan, subject to the
following terms:-
(i) that the petitioner shall make himself available for
interrogation by the police as and when required;
(ii) that the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make
any inducement, threat or promise to any person
acquainted with the facts of the accusation against him
so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the
Court or to any police officer;
(iii) that the petitioner shall not leave India without the prior
permission of the Court.
(iv) that the petitioner will seek regular bail on the
2 of 3
15-12-2017 22:49:42 :::
CRM-M-27192-2017 -3-presentation of challan in Court, which the trial Court
will decide on the basis of evidence collected during
investigation.
( SURINDER GUPTA )
December 12, 2017 JUDGE
Jyoti-II
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether Reportable: Yes/No
3 of 3
::: Downloaded on – 15-12-2017 22:49:42 :::
