Crl.Misc. No.M-19755 of 2010 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-19755 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: July 30, 2010 Satnam Singh ........Petitioner Versus State of Punjab .......Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr. S.P.S. Sidhu, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Rajni Gupta, Addl. A.G. Punjab. SABINA, J. Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.103 dated 3.9.2009, under Sections 379/411/420/468/471 of Indian Penal Code, Police Station Sultanpur Lodhi, District- Kapurthala. The contents of the FIR as reproduced in Annexure P-1 read as under :- “...........To SHO Police Station Sultanpur Lodhi, Jai Hind. Today, I SI along with HC Jarnail Singh 1168 as Duty Officer was present at police station. HC Balvir Singh 1026 got impounded vehicle Alto Car bearing No.PB-03L-3709 on 17.8.2009 as one Satnam Singh @ Satta son of Tara Singh, resident of Village Mannumachi police station Makhu, District Ferozepur could not produced the papers of car. The same vehicle was impounded under Section 207 of MV Act vide challan Crl.Misc. No.M-19755 of 2010 (O&M) 2 No.7188. HC went to Bathinda for checking of number of vehicle from DTO office. From the DTO office, clerk Devinder Kumar gave in writing that vehicle No.PH-03L- 3709 is of a motorcycle, Hero Honda and same is registered in the name of Sh. Jiwan Kumar son of Ganpat Rai Street No.2 near Sippal Hotel. On verification it is found that Satnam Singh son of Tara Singh committed offence under Section 379/411/420/467/468/471 IPC by keeping stolen car in his possession and by putting forged number plate on it. Thus present is being registered against him. I ASI is going for investigation at spot. Sd/- Charanjit Singh ASI." Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner has been falsely involved in this case due to political rivalry. A perusal of the challan book which show that the petitioner had been allegedly challaned on 17.8.2009 whereas the challan dated 18.8.2009 had already been issued. Learned State counsel, on the other hand, has submitted that due to inadvertence challan Nos.7187 and 7189 had been issued on 18.8.2009 whereas challan Nos.7190 & 7191 had been issued on 17.8.2009. Petitioner is required for custodial interrogation. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that the instant petition deserves dismissal. The allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. The Alto car driven by the petitioner was taken in possession on 17.8.2009 and it was found that a fake number had been displayed on the said car. The possibility that the petitioner had been issued challan Crl.Misc. No.M-19755 of 2010 (O&M) 3 No.7190, although challan No.7189 had been issued on an earlier date due to inadvertence cannot be ruled out, specially because challan No.7191 had also been issued on 17.8.2009. Petitioner is required for custodial interrogation. Dismissed. (SABINA) July 30, 2010 JUDGE Anand