Criminal Misc. No.M.30346 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No.M.30346 of 2010 Date of decision 25.4.2011. Gurpreet Singh @ Gopi ...... Petitioner. versus U.T.Chandigarh ...... Respondent. Present : Mr. P.S.Hundal Senior Advocate with Mr. Premjit Singh Hundal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sukant Gupta, Advocate for UT Chandigarh. Criminal Misc. No.M.33904 of 2010 Gursher Singh ...... Petitioner. versus State (U.T.Chandigarh) ...... Respondent. Present : Mr. R.S.Cheema, Senior Advocate with Mr. Pawan Girdhar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Advocate for UT Chandigarh. Criminal Misc. No.M.30346 of 2010 2 Criminal Misc. No.M.34014 of 2010 Manjit Singh ...... Petitioner. versus U.T.Chandigarh ...... Respondent. Present : Mr. G.S.Kaura, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Advocate for UT Chandigarh. Criminal Misc. No.M.4303 of 2011 Bhupinder Singh alias Bhuppi ...... Petitioner. versus State (Union Territory, Chandigarh) ...... Respondent. Present : Mr. Baldev Singh Senior Advocate with Mr. Deepinder Singh , Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Advocate for UT Chandigarh. CORAM :- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.C.PURI. Criminal Misc. No.M.30346 of 2010 3 K.C.PURI, J. By this common order, I intend to dispose of Criminal Misc. No.M.30346 of 2010 filed by Gurpreet Singh @ Gopi for grant of regular bail, Criminal Misc. No.M.33904 of 2010 filed by Gursher Singh for grant of regular, Criminal Misc. No.M.34014 of 2010 filed by Manjit Singh for grant of regular bail and Criminal Misc. No.M.4303 of 2011 filed by Bhupinder Singh alias Bhuppi for grant of anticipatory bail. These petitions have arisen out of the same FIR and incident, therefore, these are taken up together for disposal. For convenience, facts are taken from Criminal Misc. No.M.30346 of 2010. As per the case of the prosecution secret information was received vide letter dated 18.8.2010 written by Assistant Inspector General of Police (Counter Intelligence), Amritsar addressed to Senior Superintendent of Police Union Territory, Chandigarh mentioning Bhupinder Singh @ Bhupi son of Surinder Singh, Gurpreet Singh @ Gopi son of Baldev Singh, Surjit Singh alias Raju son of Santokh Singh and Manjit Singh alias Chingiahra, that during surveillance, it has come to the notice that the said persons with the connivance of other persons planning to abduct one boy, who is studying in the college of Chandigarh for ransom. On 19.8.2010 Inspector Charanjit Singh along with Inspector Amanjot Singh and other police party was present near Hotel South End, Sector 35, Chandigarh. At about 12.30p.m. Inspector Charanjit Singh received information from the informer that three persons, out of them two are foreigners and one Indian, who is doing study in Austriala is making Criminal Misc. No.M.30346 of 2010 4 plan to abduct one person from Chandigarh to demand huge money as ransom and at present the said three persons are present in the parking of Topary Park, Sector 35 Chandigarh. Accordingly, raid was conducted. A white colour Gypsy bearing registration No. DL-03-CA-2923 was found standing. On checking, two foreigners and one Indian were found sitting in the Gypsy. Gursher Singh son of Paramdeep Singh was sitting on the driver seat of the said vehicle. Grant Alan Easton and Simon Ginty were also found present in the said Gypsy. They were searched. From Gursher Singh, one kamanidar knife was recovered. From Grant Alan Easton one kamanidar knife was also recovered. Both of them could not produce any licence for keeping the same. 20 grams charas was also recovered from Simon Ginty. Air rifles were recovered from dash board. During investigation, the call record was collected, containing conversation of Gurpreet Singh, Surjit Singh and Gursher Singh, which depicts that they have made a plan to abduct the person from Chandigarh for a ransom. Statement of Harsh Sinha was also recovered, who has stated that brother of Gursher Singh was his fast friend and he has received call from Gursher Singh to meet him. Learned counsel for the petitioners have submitted that if all the allegations are taken as it is, in that case, at the most it can be said that preparation has been made for abduction. No actual attempt to abduct Harsh Sinha was made. Three of the accused are in custody for the last eight months. The trial is not likely to be concluded at an early date. They are entitled to the concession of bail. To fortify their arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners Criminal Misc. No.M.30346 of 2010 5 have relied upon authorities Koppula Venkat Rao vs. State of A.P. (2004) 3 Supreme Court Cases 602 and Ramkirpal vs. State of Madhya Pradesh JT 2007 (4) SC 393. I have carefully considered the submissions made by counsel for the petitioners-accused and have gone through the records of the case. Assistant Inspector General of Police (Counter Intelligence), Amritsar informed the Chandigarh police regarding abduction of the student. To execute the plan Gursher Singh and two foreign nationals Grant Alan Easton and Simon Ginty were ready with the plan to abduct and in order to execute the said plan knives have been purchased and Air Guns have also been arranged. As per statement of Harsh Sinha, he received a call from Gursher Singh for meeting him. It cannot be said that it was a case of only preparations but to materialize the plan of abduction all efforts were made. It is only on account of timely information by the authorities of (Counter Intelligence), the bid to abduct Harsh Sinha has been foiled. The offence complained of is serious in nature and as such does not make out a case for grant of bail. The telephonic conversation lends further corroboration to the prosecution version and as per the report of the Expert, the conversation contained the voice of Gurpreet Singh, Manjit Singh and Gursher Singh. The authorities cited by the learned counsel for the petitioners are distinguishable on the facts of the present cases and do not advance the case of the petitioners. Bhupinder Singh petitioner is seeking the anticipatory bail. The grant of anticipatory bail, at this stage, shall hamper the investigation. Criminal Misc. No.M.30346 of 2010 6 So, in view of the above discussion, all the four applications, mentioned above stand dismissed. ( K.C.PURI ) JUDGE April 25, 2011 sv