High CourtsSingle Bench(2012) 11 P&H CK 0035

Sukhpreet Singh @ Loi vs State of Punjab and Others

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 23 November 2012

HON’BLE JUDGES
Jitendra Chauhan, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
CRM No. M-33500 of 2012

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

13 paragraphs · 223 words

Jitendra Chauhan, J.—By filing the present petition u/s 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner has sought pre-arrest bail in

case FIR No. 72 dated 17.9.2012, registered under Sections 457/380/411 of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Maur, District Bathinda.

The learned State counsel on instructions from HC Kuldeep Singh, informs that though, the petitioner has joined investigation, but he is not

cooperating. He further informs that the recovery of stolen mobiles phones are yet to be effected from the petitioner.

2.

Heard.

3.

Despite the opportunity granted to the petitioner to join investigation, he though appeared before the Investigating Officer, but he is not

cooperating in the investigation.

4.

The Hon''ble Supreme Court in State rep. By the State Rep. by the C.B.I. Vs. Anil Sharma, has held as under:-

The custodial interrogation is qualitatively more elicitation oriented than questioning a suspect who is well ensconced with a favourable order u/s

438 of Cr.P.C.

5.

Keeping in view the fact that the petitioner is not cooperating in the investigation, this Court is not inclined to grant any relief to the petitioner. In

the present case, the recovery of stolen mobile phone is yet to be effected from the petitioner, therefore, his custodial interrogation is required.

Accordingly, no case is made out to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. Dismissed.