The Punjab and Haryana High criticized the police for shielding real culprits in a case involving illegal mining and stated that only poor persons have been arrayed as accused and it is a sorry state of affairs that the police is trying its best to shield the real culprits, at whose instance the illegal mining operations were being carried out.

Brief Facts:

The petitioner filed the present petition for grant of pre-arrest bail in FIR registered under Sections 21 (1) and 4(1) of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation of Development) Act, 1957.

Contentions of the Applicant:

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contended that the petitioner had no concern with the alleged occurrence and he was the driver of the tipper which was allegedly used for the commission of the offence. It was further contended that the petitioner was not found on the spot and had been falsely involved in the present case.

Observations of the Court:

The court listed the matter on a further date directed the petitioner to join the investigation and stated that in the event of arrest, he shall be released on interim bail to the satisfaction of the arresting officer subject to the conditions envisaged under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C.

The court stated that it was clear from the perusal of the record that in the present case, only poor persons vis., driver of JCB and driver of the tipper have been arrayed as accused and it is a sorry state of affairs that the police are trying its best to shield the real culprits, at whose instance the illegal mining operations were being carried out. The court stated that it seemed that the police were hand in glove with the persons, who were carrying out this illegal mining operations in the said area and directed the Senior Superintendent of Police to file a detailed report indicating the reasons why the persons, who were carrying out the illegal mining operations, have not been arrayed as accused in the present case.

The decision of the Court:

The court listed the matter on a further date and directed the SHO to personally remain present on the given date.   

Case Title: Aajamdeen vs. State of Punjab

Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.S. Shekhawat

Case No.: CRM-M-44082-2023

Advocate for the Applicant: Mr. Amandeep Saini

Advocate for the Respondent: Mr. Mohinder Singh Joshi

Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com

Picture Source :

 
Kritika