Crl. Misc.No.M-31342 of 2010 1 IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT PUNJAB AND HARYANA Crl. Misc.No.M-31342 of 2010 Date of decision 8.12.2010 Sukhwinder Singh ......Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ......Respondent Present: Mr.A.S. Manaise, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. V.P.S. Sidhu, AAG for Punjab. S.S. SARON, J. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in a case registered against him under Sections 406, 409 and 201 IPC. The Petitioner is Panchayat Secretary of Gram Panchayat Bham, Tehsil Batala, District Gurdaspur. The FIR has been registerd on the complaint of Hardial Singh. It is alleged by the complainant that a false Rapat No.21 dated 28.7. 2010 (Annexure P-1) has been got recorded by the petitioner Sukhbir Singh and Sarpanch (Sukhwinder Singh) in connivance with each other with regard to the entire record of Gram Panchayat village Bham being misplaced. The complainant had sought information regarding the record under the provisions of the Right to Information Act. The complainant on 23.7.2010 had sought certified copies of the record of Gram Panchayat, Bham through Block Development Officer (BDO), Qadian. The record included the certified copies of cash books, Accounts Books, Proceeding Register and other concerned record from 2002 onwards and the certified copies of monthly meetings of the Panchayat, six monthly general meetings and the intimation letters of the Panchayat members regarding the monthly meetings from 2007 onwards. Crl. Misc.No.M-31342 of 2010 2 The complainant received a letter no.528 dated 2.8.2010 from BDO Office, Qadian, whereby the complainant was asked to inform the BDO Office after obtaining certified copies from Gram Panchayat Bham. The complainant then received registered letter No.2 dated 5.8.2010 from the Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Bham, wherein he was informed to personally come on 13.8.2010. The complainant went to the Sarpanch and Panchayat Secretary, Sukhbir Singh to obtain the said information. However, instead of supplying him the necessary certified copies of the information the Panchayat Secretary (Petitioner) informed the complainant that the entire record from 2002 onwards has been lost. The complainant was shocked because nothing regarding this was mentioned in the notice by the Sarpanch. On the insistence of the complainant the Sarpanch and Panchayat Secretary (petitioner) gave him in writing that the record has been lost. Besides photostat copy of Rapat No.21 dated 28.7.2010 (Annexure P-1) and resolution dated 29.7.2010 for starting new record was given. The complainant informed the BDO office Qadian on 16.8.2010 and DDPO office Gurdaspur on 18.8.2010 in this regard. However, the concerned department did not take any action regarding this. In order to withhold the information sought because there were many discrepanices in the record the Panchayat Secretary and the Sarpanch connived and after giving an affidavit, they got a false rapat recorded at Police Station Sri Hargobindpur regarding the missing record. It is stated that in order to escape the action, they had lost the record and strict action may be taken. Accordingly, a request of made to conduct an enquiry. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is Panchayat Secretary and he is sought to be implicated only on the basis of suspicion and there is no direct or indirect evidence to connect the petitioner with the alleged crime. It is submitted that Sukhwinder Singh, Sarpanch of Village is rallying with the Congress Party Crl. Misc.No.M-31342 of 2010 3 and due to political rivarly he is being victimized The learned counsel for State and the complainant submit that the record had been misappropriated for which the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required. It is submitted that the record according to the petitioner has been misplaced on 28.7.2010 and Rapat No.21 dated 28.7.2010 (Annexure P-1) was recorded at the Police Station Sri Hargobindpur. However, the petitioner had sought the information earlier to the loss of the record on 23.7.2010. Besides, BDO office Qadian, had written a registered letter No.528 dated 2.8.2010 i.e. after 28.7.2010 for obtaining the certified copies from Gram Panchayat, Bham. Besides, the Sarpanch had written letter No.2 dated 5.8.2010 whereby the complainant was asked to personally come for getting the record. Therefore, it is submitted that had the record been lost on 28.7.2010 then the Secretary should have informed the Sarpanch and the Office of Block Development, Panchayat Secretary. After giving my thoughtful consideration to the matter it may be noticed that the complainant had sought record of the Gram Panchayat Bahm on 23.7.2010. Thereafter, the BDO Office wrote letter No.528 dated 2.8.2010 asking the complainant to obtain the necessary record from the Gram Panchayat and inform the Office. Thereafter, letter No.2 dated 5.8.2010 was received by the complainant from the Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Bahm whereby the complainant was asked to come personally on 13.8.2010. However, the information was not given; rather photocopy of Rapat No.21 dated 28.7.2010 (Annexure P-1) and resolution dated 29.7.2010 for starting new record were given. The petitioner has taken the stand that at the time when the record was lost, the intimation was not given because it was not in the knowledge of the petitioner that Hardial Singh, complainant had sought the record vide letter dated 23.7.2010. Be that as it may, these aspects would require to be Crl. Misc.No.M-31342 of 2010 4 investigated by the police so as to know the whereabouts of the record of the case. The custodial interrogation of the petitioner is therefore, necessary for tracing out the record which is stated to have been misplaced by the petitioner who is Panchayat Secretary. In the circumstances, no ground to grant the concession of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner is made out. The criminal miscellaneous petition is accordingly dismissed. December 08, 2010 (S.S.SARON) Jyoti 1 Judge