Judgment:
CRM No.M-141 OF2014O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM No.M-141 OF2014O&M) DECIDED ON : 28.01.2014 Gurbaksh Singh Sodhi ...Petitioner versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE K.C.PURI Present : Mr.J.S.
Brar, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr.Arshvinder Singh, Addl.
AG, Punjab.K.C.
PURI, J.
(ORAL) This is second bail petition.
The earlier bail petition was dismissed on merits vide order dated 04.09.2013 passed in CRM No.M-23499 of 2013.
Gurbaksh Singh Sodhi son of Kuldeep Singh Sodhi has applied for grant of regular bail in FIR No.74 dated 07.04.2010 under Sections 406/420 of the Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station City, Ferozepur, District Ferozepur.
The allegations against the petitioner are that he received a sum of `6 lacs on various dates for getting favourable decision from the Additional District Judge.
While dismissing the earlier bail petition, this Court observed that the allegations are Bhatia Shalini 2014.02.04 13:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRM No.M-141 OF2014O&M) -2- serious in nature and the act of petitioner has tarnished the image of judicial system.
Now, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in view of Section 437 (6) Cr.P.C, the petitioner is entitled to concession of bail.
In support of his contentions, he has relied upon authority “Sukhdev Singh versus State of Punjab”.
2009 (3) RCR (Criminal) 291 and “Smt.
Kamlesh versus State of Haryana”.
2009 (4) RCR (Criminal) 974.
So far as the relevant provisions of Section 437 (6) Cr.P.C are concerned, the same are reproduced as under :- “ (6) If, in any case triable by a Magistrate, the trial of a person accused of any non-bailable offence is not concluded within a period of sixty days from the fiRs.date fixed for taking evidence in the case, such person shall, if he is in custody during the whole of the said period, be released on bail to the satisfaction of the Magistrate, unless for reasons to be recorded in writing, the Magistrate otherwise directs.”
.
From the bare reading of said provision, it is revealed that Magistrate can dismiss the application for the reasons recorded in writing.
The offence complained of is grevious in nature.
So, the learned JMIC has rightly dismissed the application for grant of bail.
So far as Sukhdev Singh's case and Smt.
Kamlesh's case (supra).are concerned, the same were not of such serious nature and under those circumstances, the provisions of Section 437 (6) Cr.P.C were invoked on the facts of those cases.
Bhatia Shalini 2014.02.04 13:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRM No.M-141 OF2014O&M) -3- The petitioner approached the Hon'ble Apex Court for relief of grant of bail, but his application for grant of bail was dismissed by Hon'ble Apex Court.
In view of the above, no ground for grant of regular bail is made out.
Dismissed.
However, the trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.
JANUARY28 2014 (K.C.PURI) shalini JUDGE Bhatia Shalini 2014.02.04 13:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh