Criminal Misc. No.M- 12658 of 2010 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Criminal Misc. No.M- 12658 of 2010 Date of decision: 3.5.2010 Darshan Singh ......Petitioner Versus State of Punjab .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr. G.S.Singhpuria, Advocate, for the petitioner. **** SABINA, J. This petition has been filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 82 dated 7.4.2010 under Sections 409 of the Indian Penal Code (“IPC” for short), registered at Police Station City Mansa. The allegations against the petitioner is that while he was posted as Incharge of Malkhana, case property in certain FIRs was found less. The petitioner was found responsible for the said missing articles. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the Criminal Misc. No.M- 12658 of 2010 2 petitioner has been falsely involved in this case as Station House Officer of the police station concerned is inimical towards the petitioner. In the present case, it was found that in the following FIRs, the articles were missing:- 1. FIR No. 114 dated 6.4.2004 under Sections 302/201 IPC, 25/54/59 Arms Act, P.S. City Mansa. One revolver 32 Bore No.PG7269 one parcel containing empty cartridge 32 bore, one parcel containing five live cartridges of 32 bore, one parcel containing one bullet of 312 bore sealed with seal of doctor, one parcel of belonging of Manpreet Singh sealed with five seals of doctor; 2. FIR No.102 dated 9.5.2005 under Section 13- A of Gambling Act, P.S.City Mansa i.e. Currency note of Rs.10/- bearing No.07R819275 3. FIR No.109 dated 21.5.2005 under Section 13-A of Gambling Act, P.S.City Mansa i.e. Currency note of Rs.10/- bearing No.47C936990 and 4. FIR No.166 dated 6.9.2005, under Section 188 IPC, P.S. City Mansa i.e one parcel containing 70 tablets of ANXITU25 and ANXITU5 and currency note of Rs.100/- having No.9MA153812, were found missing.” Criminal Misc. No.M- 12658 of 2010 3 Keeping in view the seriousness of offence alleged to have been committed by the petitioner, no ground for grant of anticipatory bail is made out. The petitioner might be required for custodial interrogation. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed. (SABINA) JUDGE May 03, 2010 anita