Section 164 CrPC Statement Recorded Without Procedural Safeguards Or 'Cooling-Off' Period Not A Valid Confession: Jharkhand High Court Anticipatory Bail Cannot Be Denied Merely Because Investigation Is At A Nascent Stage If Custodial Interrogation Is Not Indispensable: Telangana High Court Actual Pay Drawn During Last 10 Months Must Be Basis For Pension Calculation, Regardless Of Notional Pay In Parent Bank: Punjab & Haryana High Court Limitation For Redemption Of Usufructuary Mortgage Starts Only When Mortgage Money Is Paid Or Tendered: Allahabad High Court Exclusion Of Natural Heir From Will Not A Suspicious Circumstance If Execution Is Duly Proved: Punjab & Haryana High Court Right To Travel Abroad Is A Basic Human Right; Permission Cannot Be Denied Merely Because Visit Is For 'Social Or Celebratory' Purpose: Andhra Pradesh High Court Citizen Cannot Be Externed Merely For Raising Grievances Against Government Decisions: Bombay High Court Lack Of Opportunity To Cross-Examine Partition Commissioner Does Not Vitiate Final Decree; Report Is Part Of Record: Calcutta High Court Section 27 Evidence Act Recoveries Inadmissible If Police Had Prior Knowledge Of Location Before Recording Disclosure: Delhi High Court Foreigners Act | Burden Of Proof To Establish Citizenship Solely On Proceedee, Never Shifts; Prescription For Parkinson's No Proof Of Mental Illness To Explain Testimony Contradictions: Gauhati High Court Trial Court Erred In Abating Suit While Application To Bring Legal Heirs On Record Was Pending: Gujarat High Court Places Of Worship Act 1991 Not A Shield Against Land Acquisition By State For Public Purpose: Allahabad High Court Unregistered Partition Deed Creating New Rights In Immovable Property Inadmissible In Evidence: Himachal Pradesh High Court Illiteracy No Excuse For Filing False Income Tax Returns, Court Must Presume Culpable Mental State Under Section 278E: Jharkhand High Court Trial Court Must Consider Convenience Of Family & Accused's Right To Assist Counsel While Deciding Jail Shifting Applications: J&K High Court Investigation Substantially Complete, Offence Carries Max 7 Years Jail: Karnataka High Court Grants Bail To Police Officers In Corruption Case Buyer's Knowledge Of Title Defect Doesn't Extinguish Statutory Warranty Of Title Unless Sale Deed Specifically Excludes It: Kerala High Court Madras High Court Sets Aside Appointment Of PAs To Judges, Says Relaxation Of Qualifications Via Circular Violates Article 14 BNSS | Mere Allegation Of Calling Deceased To Spot Not Sufficient To Deny Bail To Woman If Charge Sheet Filed: Orissa High Court Amendment To Rectify Property Description In Agreement To Sell Can Be Allowed At Any Stage Of Specific Performance Suit: Delhi High Court NDPS | Confession Before Police Cannot Be Sole Basis For Prosecution: Telangana High Court Grants Bail No Judicial Sanctity For Adulterous Relationships: J&K High Court Refuses To Quash Abduction FIR Involving Married Woman Habitual Offender Accused Of Brutal Murder Of SC Community Member Denied Bail: Kerala High Court Prosecution Fails To Prove Murder Charge As Recovery Witnesses Turn Hostile: Uttarakhand High Court Acquits Man Acquittal In Criminal Case Based On Benefit Of Doubt Does Not Automatically Absolve Employee From Disciplinary Liability: Madhya Pradesh High Court Punjab & Haryana HC Quashes FIR Against Woman For Dressing Pet Dog As Lord Krishna Personal Laws Cannot Be Used As Shield To Commit Gang Rape Under Garb Of Nikah Halala: Allahabad High Court

P&H HC Denies Anticipatory Bail to Government Official in Bribery Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant development, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana has dismissed a petition seeking anticipatory bail filed by Vijay Singh Dahiya, a government official, in a case related to allegations of bribery. The decision was delivered by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Gurvinder Singh Gill.

The case originated from an FIR lodged by Rinku Manchanda, who accused Dahiya of demanding a bribe for the clearance of pending bills. According to the complainant, Dahiya's acquaintance, Poonam Chopra, acted as a mediator and facilitated the bribe payment. The co-accused, Chopra, was caught red-handed while accepting the bribe, further substantiating the prosecution's case.

The court considered the evidence presented, including WhatsApp messages and CCTV footage, which indicated Dahiya's involvement in the bribery scheme. It noted the close acquaintance between Dahiya and Chopra, as well as the petitioner's approval of the complainant's bills in a short span of time. The court found these factors, along with the complainant's recording of conversations and statements from witnesses, as sufficient grounds to establish the petitioner's complicity.

Rejecting Dahiya's claim of false implication, the court held that no special circumstances existed to grant anticipatory bail. It emphasized the necessity of custodial interrogation to uncover finer details of the modus operandi and other similar instances involving Dahiya. The court expressed concerns over the petitioner's potential influence on witnesses and deemed his release after initial questioning as a prudent step by the investigating agency to collect additional evidence.

The decision highlights the court's commitment to combating corruption and ensuring accountability among public officials. The dismissal of the anticipatory bail petition serves as a stern message that individuals accused of bribery will face rigorous legal scrutiny.

Date of Decision: 2nd June 2023

Vijay Singh Dahiya  vs State of Haryana (ACB)       

Latest Legal News