Tarlochan Singh @ Tota vs State Of Punjab
2023 Latest Caselaw 19045 P&H

RAJ KUMAR
2023.11.03 18:29

2023:PHHC: 140360

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH
106
CRM-M No.55048 of 2023
DATE OF DECISION : 37 NOVEMBER, 2023
Tarlochan Singh @ Tota
...- Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab

.... Respondent
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJBIR SEHRAWAT

KRESS
Present: | Mr. Sumit Dua, Advocate for the petitioner.
OK Ok 3K
RAJBIR SEHRAWAT, J. (Oral)

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under

Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.62 dated 21.07.2023 registered under Sections 380, 323, 506, 341, 148 & 149 IPC at Police Station Rawalpindi, District Kapurthala.

2. The counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the case against the petitioner is totally frivolous and concocted one. Even as per the case of the prosecution there is no direct allegation against the petitioner. The complainant has only expressed his apprehension that the electric motor in question might have been stolen by the petitioner. There is no other case against the petitioner of similar nature. The petitioner shall join the investigation. Hence, the petitioner deserves to be protected against his arrest in the present case.

3. Notice of motion.

| attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document/judgment

RAJ KUMAR 2023.11.03 18:29

CRM-M _No.55048 of 2023 2023:PHHC: 140360

4, Mr. Sandeep, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the State.

5. The counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI

Sukhwinder Singh, has submitted that the name of the petitioner has specifically been mentioned in the FIR. The case is at the initial stage of investigation. The police are to recover the electric motor, which has been stolen by the petitioner. Therefore, his custodial interrogation is imperative in the case. Hence, the petitioner does not deserve to be protected against his arrest.

6. In view of the facts and circumstances involved in the case, as well as, the submissions made by learned counsel for the State, this court does not find it an appropriate case to interfere so as to grant concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly the present

petition is dismissed.

3° November, 2023 (RAJBIR SEHRAWAT) 'Taj' JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes No

Whether Reportable: Yes No

| attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document/judgment