Punjab-Haryana High Court
Gurjeet Singh Brar vs State Of Punjab on 13 December, 2023
Author: Anoop Chitkara
Bench: Anoop Chitkara
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:161420
CRM-M-58049-2023
207 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-58049-2023
Date of Decision: 13.12.2023
Gurjeet Singh Brar ...Pe$$oner
Versus
State of Punjab ...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA
Present: Mr. Jaspreet Singh Brar, Advocate
for the pe$$oner.
Mr. Shiva Khurmi, A.A.G., Punjab.
****
ANOOP CHITKARA, J.
FIR No. Dated Police Sta$on Sec$ons
311 02.10.2021 City Faridkot, 7, 13 (1) of PC Act, 1988
District Faridkot (Amendment Act, 2018) and
42 of Prisons Act, 1894
1. The pe$$oner who is Deputy Superintendent of Jail, Faridkot, apprehending arrest
in the FIR cap$oned above, had come up before this Court under Sec$on 438 CrPC
seeking an$cipatory bail.
2. Vide order dated 20.11.2023, this Court had granted interim an$cipatory bail to
the pe$$oner. On 04.12.2023, this Court had heard arguments and reserved the
judgment but wanted to hear the arguments again on one aspect. In addi$on to that,
this Court had come across criminal antecedents of the pe$$oner including one case of
embezzlement and as such, the pe$$oner was directed to declare his assets as well as
his spouse as per format given in the order dated 07.12.2023.
3. Counsel for the pe$$oner has handed over such assets to the State counsel in two
sets. One copy of the same will be kept by the Inves$gator and one will be given to the
employer. Counsel for the pe$$oner on instruc$ons states that they shall not take such
declara$on as self-incrimina$on, viola$on of Ar$cle 20/21 of Cons$tu$on of India or any
other Fundamental Right/Law and the bail be made absolute.
4. The prosecu$on case is being taken from reply dated 26.11.2023 filed by the
concerned DySP. One inmate Vishal Kumar made video recording about drugs, mobile
phones and other benefits extended by jail officials. The said inmate Vishal Kumar was
convicted under Sec$on 22 of NDPS Act and was undergoing sentence of 10 years of
1 of 2
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:161420
CRM-M-58049-2023
imprisonment. He revealed allega$ons against another prisoner who had received a sum
of Rs.10,000/- from him with promise to release him on parole and also ransom of
Rs.1,50,000/- given to Sarpanch Mangewala. The said Sarpanch Mangewala had caused
injuries to Avtar Singh @ Tara Dosanjh but due to interven$on of one Assistant Jail
Superintendent, no criminal ac$on was taken against him. The inmate has explicitly
declared that Sarpanch Mangewala was hands in glove with the then Assistant
Superintendent Tarsem Singh who was carrying illegal ac$vi$es by collec$ng money in
Jail through Paytm of Gurtej Singh and in 2019, on three occasions, Vishal Kumar made
payment of Rs.35,000/-, Rs.3000/- and Rs.5000/- on paytm number of Tarsem Singh. The
said Vishal Kumar regarding present pe$$oner Gurjeet Singh Brar had made allega$ons
that when he was produced before the pe$$oner, then he was shiHed to De-Addic$on
Centre. At that $me, another co-accused Gurtej Singh had told that he had been asked
by the pe$$oner and Tarsem Singh to take UPI paytm number of some other person so
that the amount can be received from Vishal Kumar and no specific allega$on has been
levelled against the pe$$oner.
5. An analysis of the pleadings and arguments would lead to following outcome.
Warden Gurtej Singh had told that he was asked by the pe$$oner and Tarsem Singh to
take paytm number of some other person. AHer that allega$ons of taking money are
against Tarsem Singh on two occasions of Rs.70,000/- and Rs.50,000/-, whereas there is
no specific allega$on that even the pe$$oner had received any money. Thus, the case of
the pe$$oner is on different foo$ng from Tarsem Singh.
6. Thus, in the en$rety of facts and circumstances of the case, the pe$$oner makes
out a case for an$cipatory bail and it is neither a case for custodial interroga$on nor pre-
trial incarcera$on.
7. Given above, pe on is allowed. Interim orders dated 20.11.2023 and 07.12.2023
are made absolute. All pending applica$ons, if any, stand disposed. It is clarified that the
observa$ons made in this order are only for the purposes of deciding the present bail
pe$$on and the trial Court shall not advert to these comments.
(ANOOP CHITKARA)
JUDGE
13.12.2023
Jyo$ Sharma
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes
Whether reportable: No.
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:161420
2 of 2
