MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

Defense Personnel's Bail Denied in National Security Compromise Case, Says High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant development, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed the bail application of Harpreet Singh, a defense personnel, in a case involving serious allegations of compromising national security and sharing secret information. The judgment, delivered by Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul, highlighted the gravity of the accusations against the petitioner.

The court observed, "Prima facie there are very grave, serious and specific allegations against the petitioner of having supplied critical information and photographs pertaining to various army installations to the co-accused who in turn supplied it to Pakistan for which they all received money." The decision emphasized the potential threat to the safety and security of the nation.

Harpreet Singh had sought bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, in a case registered under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, along with other relevant sections. The petitioner's counsel argued that their client had been falsely implicated based on a weak disclosure statement and highlighted the lack of recovery of any narcotics. However, the court found these arguments insufficient to grant bail.

While acknowledging the absence of narcotics recovery, the court noted, "there were serious allegations against the petitioner of having compromised with the safety and security of the nation by sharing secret documents and information about various military installations/stations with co-accused." The allegations came to light when a co-accused was apprehended with heroin and a mobile phone containing critical information about army posts and other sensitive details.

The court's decision reflected its concern for national security, stating, "Given the aforementioned facts and circumstances, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of regular bail." The judgment highlighted the seriousness of the allegations and the potential harm caused by the compromise of sensitive information.

Date of Decision: 04.07.2023

Harpreet Singh @ Happy  VS State of Punjab

Latest Legal News