Allowed

Balbir Kaur and Ors. v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC5 Oct 2009CRM-M/15961/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana considered a bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The applicant noted that one petitioner had already joined the investigation. The court, without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case, made the bail order absolute subject to joining the investigation and complying with conditions. Petition disposed.

What did the court decide?

Petition for anticipatory bail made absolute; petitioners directed to join investigation as required and abide by conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

Balbir Kaur and Ors. Vs State of Punjab — Anticipatory Bail | Punjab & Haryana HC (2009)

¶1

CRM-M-15961 of 2009

¶2

- 1 -

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

¶5

CRM-M-15961 of 2009

¶6

DATE OF DECISION:15.10.2009

¶7

¶8

Balbir Kaur and others

¶9

. . . . Petitioners

¶10

VS.

¶11

State of Punjab . . . . Respondent

¶12

¶13

CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN

¶14

¶15

Present: Mr.K.S. Sidhu, Sr. Advocate with Mr.M.S. Brar, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶16

Ms.Rajni Gupta, Addl. A.G. Punjab for the State/respondent.

¶17

Mr.A.K. Walia, Advocate for the complainant.

¶18

¶19

RAKESH KUMAR JAIN J.

¶20

Petitioners have applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short ‘Cr.P.C.’) in case registered vide FIR No.170 dated 22.5.2009 under Sections 380, 120-B IPC at Police Station Tripuri Town, District Patiala.

¶21

The aforesaid FIR has been registered on the complaint of Gurmeet Kaur wife of Harbhajan Singh, in which she has alleged that her son Jatinder Pal Singh Virk is a citizen of Canada and is permanently residing there. He was married to Sukhjit Kaur one year ago and had returned to Canada after marriage. In the month of January 2009, he came from Canada and returned on 26.5.2009. He had kept his passport, 5000 Canadian dollar, 20

¶22

CRM-M-15961 of 2009

¶23

- 2 -

¶24

tolas of gold and Rs.1,10,000/- in Indian currency in the house, which was within the knowledge of Sukhjit Kaur. A few days back, Sukhjit Kaur had an altercation with complainant’s son that he should take her too to Canada at the earliest whereas complainant’s son wanted to take her to Canada after one year. On 19.5.2009 at about 12 noon, Sukhjit Kaur had called her parents along with her maternal Uncle Joginder Singh Cheema and maternal aunt Surjit Kaur to her house (i.e. to the house of the complainant) where they gave threats and gave her beatings. It is also alleged in the complaint that “they forcibly took away these articles”.

¶25

Before coming to this Court, the petitioners had applied for anticipatory bail, which was dismissed by Addl. District Judge, Patiala vide her order dated 1.6.2009.

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioners, inter alia, contends that petitioner No.2 Sukhjit Kaur (daughter in law) has also filed one FIR No.216 on 26.5.2009, under Sections 406, 498-A IPC against Jatinder Pal Singh, her mother-in-law Gurmeet Kaur (complainant), her sister-in-law Narender Pal Kaur and husband of sister-in-law Tarsem Singh. It is also submitted that Jatinder Pal Singh has already left India for Canada on his passport and is now in Canada.

¶27

In this case, State/respondent has filed an affidavit of Amarpreet Singh, PPS, DSP, Headquarter, Patiala, holding charge of DSP City II, Patiala, who has stated on oath that complaint, on the basis of which the present FIR has been registered, has been found to be false. The enquiry was entrusted to ASI Satnam Singh, Police Station Tripuri, Patiala, DSP/Det. Patiala and Inspector Hardip Singh SHO, who all have observed that the FIR is false.

¶28

CRM-M-15961 of 2009

¶29

- 3 -

¶30

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that pursuant to the order dated 05.06.2009, petitioners have already joined the investigation.

¶31

Learned counsel for the State/respondent, on instructions received from the Investigating Officer, admits that the petitioners have joined the investigation. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the cases, order dated 05.06.2009 is hereby made absolute.

¶32

It is directed that the petitioners shall join the investigation as and when required and shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged by Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

¶33

Petition is disposed of.

¶34

(RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) OCTOBER 15, 2009 JUDGE vivek

Balbir Kaur and Ors. v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balbir Kaur and Ors. v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Singh Vs State of Haryana

Virender and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Anr.

Surinder Mohan Sharma and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Hardeep Kaur Vs State of Punjab

Laxman Vs State of Haryana

Faquir Chand and Ors. Vs State of Haryana