CRM-M-26432 of 2011 (O&M) - 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** CRM-M-26432 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision:15.09.2011 Vikram @ Kalu . . .Petitioner Versus State of Punjab . . . Respondent ***** CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN ***** Present: Mr.Kiran Kumar, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.K.D. Sachdeva, Addl. A.G. Punjab. ***** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J (ORAL) This is a petition for pre-arrest bail in a case registered vide FIR No.30 dated 12.2.2011 under Section 382/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’) at Police Station Division No.4, Jalandhar. Allegation against the petitioner is that he along with Sunil Kumar (Co-accused/non-applicant) has snatched the handbag of the wife of the complainant which contained passport, ear-rings (gold) and some Indian as well as foreign currency. Sunil Kumar was arrested and has been released on bail after recovery. The petitioner had applied for pre-arrest bail before the Court below in which he was granted interim bail but ultimately his bail application was dismissed on the ground that recovery of the looted articles is yet to be effected from him and the investigation is still on. On the last date of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner had argued that recovery from Sunil Kumar (co-accused) has already been effected, therefore, nothing is to be recovered from him. However, learned counsel for the State submits that recovery from Sunil Kumar was effected of the articles found in his possession but the other articles are yet to be recovered like ear-rings (gold) etc. from the petitoiner CRM-M-26432 of 2011 (O&M) - 2 - Keeping in view the fact that this type of offences have increased manifolds due to which the common man is not safe even on the road, therefore, I do not find it to be a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. Hence, the present petition is hereby dismissed. (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) SEPTEMBER 15, 2011 JUDGE Vivek