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 Minimum Wages Cannot Be Ignored While Determining Just Compensation: Andhra Pradesh High Court Re-Fixes Income of Deceased Mason, Enhances Interest to 7.5% 34 IPC | Common Intention Is Inferred From Manner Of Attack, Weapons Carried And Concerted Conduct: Allahabad High Court Last Date of Section 4 Publication Is Crucial—Error in Date Cannot Depress Market Value: Bombay High Court Enhances Compensation in Beed Land Acquisition Appeals Order 26 Rule 10-A CPC | Rarest of Rare: When a Mother Denies Her Own Child: Rajasthan High Court Orders DNA Test to Decide Maternity Acquittal Is Not a Passport Back to Uniform: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Dismissal of Constable in NDPS Case Despite Trial Court Verdict Limitation Under Section 468 Cr.P.C. Cannot Be Ignored — But Section 473 Keeps the Door Open in the Interest of Justice: P&H HC Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness Employee Cannot Switch Cadre At His Sweet Will After Accepting Promotion: J&K High Court Rejects Claim For Retrospective Assistant Registrar Appointment Anticipatory Bail Cannot Expire With Charge-Sheet: Supreme Court Reiterates Liberty Is Not Bound by Procedural Milestones Order II Rule 2 Cannot Eclipse Amendment Power Under Order VI Rule 17: MP High Court Refuses to Stall Will-Based Title Suit Grounds of Arrest Must Be Personal, Not Formal – But Detailed Allegations Suffice: Kerala High Court Upholds Arrest in Sabarimala Gold Misappropriation Case Grounds of Arrest Are Not a Ritual – They Are a Constitutional Mandate Under Article 22(1): Allahabad High Court Sets Aside Arrest for Non-Supply of Written Grounds Sect. 25 NDPS | Mere Ownership Cannot Fasten NDPS Liability – ‘Knowingly Permits’ Must Be Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt: MP High Court Section 308 CrPC | Revocation of Pardon Is Not Automatic on Prosecutor’s Certificate: Karnataka High Court Joint Family and Ancestral Property Are Alien to Mohammedan Law: Gujarat High Court Sets Aside Injunction Right to Health Cannot Wait for Endless Consultations: Supreme Court Pulls Up FSSAI Over Delay in Front-of-Pack Warning Labels If A Son Dies Intestate Leaving Wife And Children, The Mother Has No Share: Karnataka High Court

Prima Facie Evidence on Record to Make it a Triable Case: Supreme Court Upholds Summoning of Police Inspector in Corruption Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has dismissed an appeal filed by Inspector Gurdev Singh Bhalla, challenging the order of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana. The High Court had dismissed the criminal revision against the summoning of the appellant under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, in a case involving allegations of corruption and extortion by police officials.

The bench, comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Rajesh Bindal, observed that there is "prima facie evidence on record to make it a triable case" against the appellant. This statement forms the crux of the Court's decision to dismiss the appeal, allowing the trial to proceed against Inspector Bhalla and other involved officials.

The case originated from an FIR lodged against Devraj Miglani for misappropriating paddy worth Rs.4.18 crores. During the investigation, led by Inspector Bhalla, allegations surfaced of extortion and corruption by the police. The informant, Puneet Miglani, son of the accused Devraj, claimed that the police, including Bhalla, demanded large sums of money from his family, exploiting their vulnerable situation.

In the trial, Miglani moved an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C., seeking the summoning of the appellant and three other police officials. The Trial Court initially rejected this application but later allowed it, leading to the summoning of the appellant. Bhalla challenged this decision, arguing that there was no substantial evidence against him and that the allegations were a retaliation for his testimony against Devraj Miglani.

The Supreme Court, after a thorough examination of the case, found the allegations substantial enough to warrant a trial. The judgment emphasized the need for a fair trial, stating that the observations made in the order should not influence the Trial Court. The Court further clarified that the trial should proceed based on the evidence presented, uninfluenced by the Supreme Court's current findings.

This ruling has significant implications for the accountability of police officials and the integrity of the judicial process in cases involving allegations of corruption within the law enforcement system. The dismissal of the appeal by the Supreme Court paves the way for a transparent and fair trial, ensuring that justice is served.

Date of Decision: 5th January 2024

GURDEV SINGH BHALLA VS STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.   

 

Latest Legal News