Supreme Court – Daily Orders
Hardyal Inder Singh vs State Of Punjab on 8 April, 2025
Author: Dipankar Datta
Bench: Dipankar Datta
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1860/2025
[Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.18016/2024]
HARDYAL INDER SINGH APPELLANT
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB RESPONDENT
WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL Nos.1861-1862/2025
[Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.18042-18043/2024]
HARDYAL INDER SINGH APPELLANT
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB RESPONDENT
ORDER
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1860/2025
1. Leave granted.
2. The High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh, by the
impugned judgment and order dated 03 rd December, 2024, has rejected
the appellant’s prayer for bail in anticipation of arrest.
3. FIR No.44/2022 dated 28th February, 2022 was registered at Police
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
rashmi dhyani pant
Station Division No.5, Ludhiana, Punjab for offence punishable under
Date: 2025.04.09
17:51:27 IST
Reason:
Sections 380 read with Sections 411, 427, 454, 409, 201 and 120-B of
the Indian Penal Code, 18601.
4. It is alleged in the FIR that a judicial file was stolen from the relevant
court premises; that the stolen file had been delivered to the appellant
via two co-accused, Chetan Kumar and Deepak Dogra, one after the
other; and that, ultimately, the file was recovered by the police from a
local salon owned by another co-accused, Hassan.
5. Although the appellant was not named in the FIR, his name
transpired in a disclosure statement made by the co-accused, Deepak
Dogra. Later, co-accused Hassan is reported to have also stated before
the police that he had kept the stolen judicial file in his salon on
telephonic instructions received from the appellant, who happened to be
a customer of Hassan.
6. The allegation of theft of a judicial file is, indeed, very serious.
7. We have heard Mr. Siddharth Dave and Mr. M. Shoeb Alam, learned
senior counsel appearing for the appellant in the two appeals as well as
Mr. Mohd. Irshad Ahmad, learned Additional Advocate General, appearing
for the respondent-State of Punjab.
8. Admittedly, upon investigation made by the relevant Deputy
Commissioner of Police, a closure report dated 19th May, 2022 under
Section 173(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was filed before
the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana. However, by
an order dated 04th July, 2022, the Magistrate refused to accept the
closure report and in fact discarded the same with direction to the
investigating officer of the case to continue with investigation and to
1 IPC
2
report developments by 11th July, 2022.
9. From the counter affidavit filed by the respondent-State of Punjab, it
appears that although challan has been filed against the co-accused,
Chetan Kumar and Deepak Dogra, investigation against the appellant is
still in progress and that it is proposed to file challan/final report, as the
case may be, upon completion of such investigation.
10. It has not been disputed before us that the appellant was called
thrice by the investigating officer and that he has joined the
investigation. It is also undisputed that a computer monitor, which
allegedly was stolen along with the judicial file, has since been
recovered.
11. In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances that
investigation against the appellant has remained incomplete for more
than two and half years, even after further investigation was ordered,
coupled with the fact that the appellant has joined investigation, we are
of the considered opinion that his custodial interrogation is not warranted
and that the interim order passed by this Court, giving protection to the
appellant from arrest, ought to be made absolute. Ordered accordingly.
12. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned judgment and order.
13. It is directed that in the event of the appellant being arrested, he
shall be released on bail by the trial court on terms and conditions to be
fixed by the trial court.
14. It is made clear that in the event in future the appellant is found to
be prima facie involved in a similar offence as it has transpired or acts in
any manner interfering with the administration of justice and a complaint
3
to that effect is received by the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana, the
Council may take appropriate steps according to law including
suspending the license of the appellant for such period as it may
determine.
15. Needless to observe, the appellant shall not, directly or indirectly, by
making inducement, threat or promise, dissuade any person acquainted
with the facts of the case from disclosing such facts to any police officer
or to the court.
16. We also clarify that the observations made in this order and grant of
bail to the appellant in anticipation of arrest will not be treated as
findings on the merits of the case.
17. The appeal is, accordingly, allowed on the aforesaid terms. Pending
applications, if any, stand closed.
CRIMINAL APPEAL Nos.1861-1862/2025
18. Leave granted.
19. These two appeals are directed against the common judgment and
order of the High Court, dismissing two applications 2 filed by the
appellant. In CRM-M-30932-2022, the appellant sought for
quashing/setting aside of the order dated 14 th July, 2022 passed by the
Magistrate declaring him as a proclaimed person and directing
proceedings under section 174A of the IPC to be initiated against him
together with other proceedings, whereas in CRM-M-28881-2022, the
appellant sought quashing of order dated 4 th July, 2022 by which the
2 CRM-M-30932-2022 and CRM-M-28881-2022
4
aforesaid closure report dated 19 th May, 2022 submitted by the
prosecution had been discarded and direction was issued to the
investigating officer, which has been noted above while disposing of
Criminal Appeal No.1860 of 2025.
20. While we find no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment
insofar as it dismisses CRM-M-28881-2022, we set aside the order dated
14th July, 2022 passed by the Magistrate declaring the appellant to be a
proclaimed offender in view of the order of disposal of Criminal Appeal
No.1860/2025.
21. The appeals, accordingly, stand disposed of on the above terms.
Pending application(s), if any, stand closed.
……………………….J.
(DIPANKAR DATTA)
……………………….J.
(MANMOHAN)
New Delhi;
April 08, 2025.
5
ITEM NO.14 COURT NO.12 SECTION II-B
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 18016/2024
[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 03-12-2024
in CRMM No. 30276/2022 passed by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana
at Chandigarh]
HARDYAL INDER SINGH Petitioner
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB Respondent
(With I.A. No.295639/2024-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED
JUDGMENT and I.A. No.295641/2024-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.)
WITH
SLP(Crl) No. 18042-18043/2024 (II-B)
(FOR ADMISSION and I.R.; I.A. No.296271/2024-EXEMPTION FROM FILING
C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and I.A. No.296273/2024-EXEMPTION FROM
FILING O.T.)
Date : 08-04-2025 These petitions were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHANFor Petitioner(s) :Mr. Siddharth Dave, Sr. Adv.
Mr. M. Shoeb Alam, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Nikhil Jain, AOR
Mr. Manish Verma, Adv.
For Respondent(s) :Mohd. Irshad Ahmad, A.A.G.
Ms. Baani Khanna, AOR
Mr. Robin Singh, Adv.
Mr. Kapil Balwani, Adv.
Ms. Tejal Nagauri, Adv.
6
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. Criminal Appeal No.1860/2025 is allowed and Criminal Appeal
Nos.1861-1862/2025 stand disposed of in terms of the signed order.
3. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
(RASHMI DHYANI PANT) (SUDHIR KUMAR SHARMA)
ASST. REGISTRAR-CUM-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)
(signed order is placed on the file)
7
[ad_1]
Source link