Court reject bail of notorious theif
JKUT (Jammu), July-03-2021-( JNF):- CJM Jammu Amarjeet Singh Langeh today rejected the bail application of notorious thief namely Balwant Raj who was involved in various thief cases.
While rejecting bail application, CJM Jammu Amarjeet Singh Langeh observed that 1. Examination of police report indicates that on 14.06.2021 complainant in the case lodged a written report with Police Post Sainik Colony -Jammu alleging therein that on 27.05.2021 his shuttering pipes numbering about 150 have been stolen from his godown at flat no. E-6/681 Sainik Colony after breaking lock of the gate. Complainant further alleged that he came to know that certain persons entered the gate alongwith load carrier and took away the pipes in said vehicle. Necessary entry was made in the daily diary by police post concerned and matter submitted to police station Channi Himmat, Jammu for registration of FIR where FIR no. 115/2021 was registered and investigation started. During investigation, it is stated that applicant was rounded up and during sustained interrogation he disclosed that after committing thefts of pipes, he sold the same to one scrap dealer namely Ashok Kumar. Investigating Officer present in the court stated that 106 pipes have been recovered and 44 are yet to be recovered. It is also stated that applicant is also involved in three FIRs earlier bearing no. 82/2021 for offence under section 379 of IPC and FIR no. 128/2021 for offence under section 379 of IPC. Both these FIRs are stated to be registered with Police Station Domana while as the third FIR is no. 13/2017 for offence under section 379 of RPC registered with Police Station Channi Himmat, Jammu. Present therefore is the 4 FIR against applicant and that too pertaining to theft and house-breaking. 5. Investigation, as said hereinabove – would show that present is the 4th FIR against applicant out of which three have been registered in the running year 2021. Two of the earlier FIRs against applicant are with police station Domana while as the other one bearing no. 13/2017 for offence under section 379 of RPC is with Police Station Channi Himmat, Jammu. Instant FIR is for offences under sections 454 and 380 of IPC. Interestingly, all the cases registered against applicant pertain to theft. Facts therefore would roundly discern that applicant is prima facie a habitual offender. Registration of 4 FIR within six months this year would only show that applicant has not dumped his instinct and morbid fascination to indulge in burglary (theft) repeatedly and at regular intervals. Notably, allegations against applicant are not that he stole a loaf of bread from the store to feed his family. Instead, applicant is alleged to have committed theft of 150 shuttering pipes from a godown at Sainik Colony out of which 106 pipes are stated to have been recovered pursuant to disclosure made by applicant during investigation. The Modus operandi adopted by applicant to commit offence in question is also daring. A load carrier alongwith certain persons seems to have been engaged in the process where after an entry was made at the place of occurrence and theft as alleged is committed. All this would prima facie show that applicant is a career/professional burglar/offender. The evidence collected during investigation so points out. It also needs to be noted that crimes like one in hand are against community as a whole. Also, incidents of theft in recent times have shown an alarming escalation in Jammu and these incidents are much to anguish and dis¬enchantment of public at large. It needs no re-iteration that while considering bail application of a person who seems to be prima facie habitual offender, discretion to grant bail cannot be exercised in a whimsical manner and interest of society at large in such cases has also to be duly considered and taken note of ( Vide (2007) 1 SCC 70). In the case in hand, all factors viz nature and gravity of offence involved, character of evidence in support of allegations, punishment that the offences involved carry and general impact on public at large of the offences involved in the case – go poignantly against applicant more particularly when investigation is at initial stage and subject matter of theft has not been wholly recovered. JNF