RAMAN KUMAR vs STATE OF PUNJAB

REEMA SAINI 2026.07.16 18:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CRM-M-38275 of 2026 (O&M) -2- earrings were not recovered from the apprehended boy. It was stated that Raman fled away on motor cycle bearing registration No.PB-08-3202 CT- 100. Legal action was prayed for. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was innocent and had committed no offence. The only evidence against the petitioner was the disclosure statement of co-accused which was not admissible in evidence. In the disclosure statement, complete particulars of the petitioner were not disclosed and there were several other Ramans in the village. He further submits that recovery of gold ear rings had since been effected from the spot and custodial interrogation of the petitioner was not required, therefore, petitioner deserved to be released on anticipatory bail. 4. Learned State counsel has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and on instruction from ASI Avtar Singh submits that custodial interrogation of the petitioner was required for recovery of the motor cycle used in the commission of offence whereon a false number plate had been affixed. The pol