Judgment:
Rajan Gupta, J.
Oral:
On the last date of hearing following order was passed in this case:-
“Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that a detailed inquiry was conducted in the case by ADCP-I, Ludhiana. He found that Dy.S.P., who is alleged to have demanded a bribe/ransom for release of NRI Beant Lal, was found innocent. However, only departmental action was recommended against him on the advice of Deputy District Attorney, Ludhiana. He submits that in view of the fact that merely departmental action has been initiated against the police official, petitioner cannot be held guilty of crime under section 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and section 506 IPC.
Learned State counsel has opposed the prayer. He submits that in view of the inquiry conducted by the Additional Deputy Commissioner of Police and the legal opinion obtained thereon, concerned Dy.S.P. was not arraigned as an accused in the FIR. However, complicity of the petitioner and his co-accused Harbhajan Singh is proved. They are not entitled to concession of pre-arrest bail.
Brief facts of the case are that Amandeep Singh lodged the FIR. He submitted that his father Beant Lal was residing in USA for last seven years. He had returned to India on 10th May, 2011. On 23rd May, 2011, a police party took away his father on the pretext that an inquiry was pending before Naginder Rana, Dy.S.P. On the next day, Amandeep Singh alongwith some members of Panchayat were on their way to meet the Dy.S.P. and when they were near Phillaur, they received a call from mobile No. 9878708232 asking them to return home. After 20 minutes another call was received and they were told to bring Rs.2,50,000/- alongwith them. They money was to be handed over to petitioner and co-accused Harbhajan Singh. Complainant was told that in case the amount was paid, his father would be released. Accordingly, amount was remitted to the accused and father of the complainant (Beant Singh) was got released from illegal detention. After three days another call was received from the petitioner to pay balance amount of Rs. 2,50,000/-. As father of complainant who is NRI was afraid, he immediately returned to USA. On reaching there, he sent a fax message to Commissioner of police, Ludhiana bringing to light the facts about his abduction and payment of ransom. The present FIR was registered thereafter.
A query has been put to learned State counsel about the basis on which co-accused Dy.S.P. was exonerated as well as the legal opinion given by the office of District Attorney, Ludhiana. He submits that in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case he needs very short adjournment to seek instructions from Director General of Police, Punjab,. Prayer is accepted.
To come up on 1.6.2012.
Copy of the order be handed over to learned State counsel under signatures of Court Secretary. ”
Learned State counsel has today apprised the court that he has discussed the matter with Director General of Police, Punjab. He has instruction to submit that issue can be handed-over to Inspector General of Police (Crime) for inquiry/investigation. In view of same, this court deems it a fit case to entertain of its own motion. The petition be listed accordingly by the registry as ‘Court of its own motion vs. State of Punjab’ after soliciting orders from Hon’ble the Chief Justice.
Main case
After arguing at some length, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he may be allowed to withdraw this petition with liberty to the petitioner to surrender before the investigating agency/trial court and thereafter seek regular bail.
Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as aforesaid.
In case petitioner surrenders within ten days from today and applies for bail, his plea shall be decided expeditiously.