SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Jan Mohd vs State Of Haryana on 27 March, 2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGAR

Sr. No. 101 CRM-M-10321-2017
Decided on : 27.03.2017

Jan Mohd. ….. Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

State of Haryana ….. Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL

Present: Mr. Mohammad Arshad, Advocate, for the petitioner(s).

*******

DEEPAK SIBAL, J. (ORAL)

Through the present petition filed under Section 438 Cr. P. C.,

the petitioner seeks the concession of anticipatory bail in FIR No. 136, dated

11.02.2017, registered under Section 406 IPC and Sections 7, 10 and 55 of

the Essential Commodities Act, at Police Station Sadar Palwal, District

Palwal.

The case of the prosecution is that on the complaint of the

villagers the ration depot of the petitioner was checked where no wheat was

found and when he was asked to provide the record with regard to the receipt

and disbursement of wheat from May, 2016 to October, 2016, in spite of

repeated requests, such record was withheld. On the other hand, the

complaint-villagers produced their ration cards on the analysis of which it

was found that the petitioner had misappropriated about 18 quintals 90 kgs

of wheat which was supposed to be distributed to ration card holders.

Seeking anticipatory bail for the petitioner, learned counsel

submits that there is a delay in lodging of the FIR; that the petitioner is ready

to join investigation and that the present case has been lodged against him as

a counter-blast.

1 of 2
08-04-2017 00:30:35 :::
CRM-M-10321-2017 -2-

The petitioner is a depot holder who is required to distribute

wheat to ration card holders on subsidized price. Investigations done till

date have shown that he has misappropriated 18 quintals 90 kgs of wheat.

He has also not cooperated with the investigating agency as even after

repeated requests, he has withheld relevant record from the authorities. The

plea that the present case has been lodged against the petitioner as a counter-

blast, is absolutely vague as no motive is shown to falsely implicate the

petitioner

Whether the petitioner has indulged in misappropriation of

wheat to be distributed amongst ration card holders by selling the same in

black/open market for the period beyond what is being investigated, is

required to be probed. The record which has been withheld by the petitioner

also needs to be recovered.

In view of the above, I am of the opinion, that the present case

is not a fit one for the grant of anticipatory bail.

Dismissed.

Nothing observed herein-above shall be considered to be an

expression of opinion by this Court on the merits of the case.

27.03.2017 [ DEEPAK SIBAL ]
shamsher JUDGE

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No
Whether reportable : Yes / No

2 of 2
08-04-2017 00:30:36 :::

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation