Selected menu has been deleted. Please select the another existing nav menu.
=

HC dismisses anticipatory bail pleas of ex-Punjab minister’s father, PA in abetment to suicide case

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet consectetur. Facilisis eu sit commodo sit. Phasellus elit sit sit dolor risus faucibus vel aliquam. Fames mattis.

HTML tutorial

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has dismissed the anticipatory bail pleas of Sukhdev Singh Bhullar, father of Punjab’s former transport minister Laljit Singh Bhullar, and Dilbagh Singh alias Baga, the minister’s personal assistant, in an abetment to suicide case.Justice Aman Chaudhary recorded that Sukhdev Bhullar had participated in a tender process, which was allotted to M/s Baba Naga Agro Private Limited. But the now-deceased, Gagandeep Singh Randhawa, the district manager of Punjab State Warehousing Corporation, was allegedly being compelled to cancel it and allot it to Sukhdev Bhullar.“On March 13, allegedly a video was prepared at the house of the said minister, a fact affirmed during the course of investigation, as the sofa set and curtains seen therein matched with the ones available in one room of the residential house of the main accused…”Justice Chaudhary further recorded that the deceased was allegedly forced to confess to having accepted a bribe and was subjected to physical assault. “It has also been stated by a witness that the deceased had on the way back to Amritsar disclosed that threats were extended to him and granted a week’s time, for getting the tender re-allotted in the name of Sukhdev Singh Bhullar-petitioner. Immediately on expiry of the said period, he committed suicide on March 21”.Justice Chaudhary asserted: “Considering the gravity of the allegations, permitting the petitioners to join the investigation with a protective umbrella of pre-arrest bail will impede the thorough and effective investigation to elicit the truth; moreover the recovery of the DVR, which was allegedly removed, as also of the pistol and mobile phones are yet to be effected; there being an apprehension expressed of them influencing the witnesses and tampering with the evidence, their custodial interrogation is stated to be imperative, thus this court does not find it to be a case for granting anticipatory bail. There being no merit in the petitions, the same are hereby dismissed.

HTML tutorial

Tags :

Search

Popular Posts


Useful Links

Selected menu has been deleted. Please select the another existing nav menu.

Recent Posts

©2025 – All Right Reserved. Designed and Developed by JATTVIBE.