This story is from October 4, 2016

Police probe 'genuine', bail for lawyer

Police probe 'genuine', bail for lawyer
Chandigarh: While the arrest of advocate Jatin Salwan in the case of planting of contraband and fake currency had led to protests and suspension of work by Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar Association members, a report prepared by senior advocate Anupam Gupta, who was assisting the court in the matter as amicus curiae, has said the Chandigarh police investigation in the case was "bona fide".
1x1 polls

The report assumes more significance as lawyers had accused police of carrying out a mala fide investigation against Salwan.
In his report submitted before the court of Justice Jitendra Chauhan, Gupta has submitted that after going through the police diary and challan, he has come to the conclusion that the police have carried the investigation in the case in a bona fide manner and allegation or apprehensions of mala fide were unfounded.
"Police investigation has been conducted very efficiently and competently. Factually speaking, all the factual accusations against Salwan and other accused are true and well-founded," Gupta has said in the report.
Gupta, however, has informed the court that Salwan's role has been found limited to section 58 (2) of NDPS, which has a provision of maximum sentence of two years but he cannot be prosecuted under other serious charges slapped by police under section 18 of NDPS Act and section 489 of the IPC.
"There is clear and strong evidence regarding Salwan's culpability under section 58 (2) of NDPS Act, which is related to malicious and false information, but legally he cannot be prosecuted under other charges which are serious in nature. Since the charges under which there is strong evidence against Salwan, is punishable with sentence up to two years, he is entitled to be released on bail," Gupta had submitted in his report.
Hearing all the parties and considering the report submitted by amicus curiae, Justice Chauhan granted bail to Salwan. Justice Chauhan, however, has not commented on the merit of the case.
End of Article
FOLLOW US ON SOCIAL MEDIA