Please Log in / Register to access the full text of this judgment and the entire database
(2022) Law Today Live Doc. Id. 16658
Decided on: 08.04.2022
Present:
Mr. Maninder Singh Bajwa, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Bhupender Beniwal, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab
Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 384, 387, 506 -- Arms Act, 1959 (54 of 1959), Sections 25, 27, 54, 59 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 173, 439 – Extortion matter -- Habitual offender – Regular bail -- All relevant recoveries effected at the instance of the bail applicant/ petitioner -- Report u/s 173 of the Cr.P.C. filed -- No further cooperation of the bail applicant / petitioner required -- Applicant suffering judicial incarceration since 21.12.2021 – Petitioner admitted to bail -- Stringent conditions upon imposed.
(Para 3-7)
***
SURESHWAR THAKUR, J. (ORAL) –
1. The petitioner, by filing the present petition cast under Section 439 Cr.P.C., seeks grant of regular bail in case FIR No. 0189 of 22.12.2021, which was registered against him, at Police Station Majitha, District Amritsar Rural, constituting therein offences under Sections 384, 387, 506 of the IPC (Sections 25, 27-54-59 of the Arms Act, 1959, added later on).
2. The bail applicant-petitioner is stated to be suffering judicial incarceration since 21.12.2021.
3. The learned State Counsel, on instructions, meted to him, by the Investigating Officer (IO), submits, that all the relevant recoveries have been effected at the instance of the bail applicant / petitioner, to the IO concerned, and, that after completion of the entire investigation in the FIR (supra), a report under Section 173 of the Cr.P.C., has been filed, before the learned Magistrate concerned, and, that no further cooperation of the bail applicant / petitioner, is required, in the relevant investigations.
4. Bearing in mind the afore, and, also bearing in mind the fact that the bail applicant is suffering judicial incarceration since 21.12.2021. Therefore, it is not deemed fit to order for any prolongation of the judicial incarceration of the petitioner, as, thereupon, his personal liberty would become unnecessarily curtailed and fettered. Contrarily, it is deemed appropriate to admit to bail, the bail petitioner.
5. However, the learned State Counsel opposes the grant of bail to the bail applicant, on the ground that the bail applicant is a habitual offender.
6. The afore made submission is benumbed, upon this Court, making stringent conditions upon the bail applicant, inasmuch as, his making an undertaking before the learned trial Court, that he shall not re-indulge in any criminal activity, whereupon, on breach threreof, the benefit of regular bail, as granted to him shall become ipso facto annulled, leaving liberty to the Arresting Officer, to forthwith arrest him, and, to thereafter, produce the bail applicant before the learned Magistrate concerned, for appropriate directions, vis-a-vis, an order of judicial custody being made, upon him.
7. Consequently, with condition (supra), the instant petition is allowed, and the bail applicant – petitioner is ordered to be released from judicial custody, on his furnishing personal and surety bonds in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- each, before the learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned, and, also subject to his not tampering with prosecution evidence, and/or not influencing prosecution witnesses, and, also his appearing before the trial Court concerned as and when he is required to be making his personal appearance unless validly exempted.
Petition allowed.
********