In a criminal misc. matter regarding an anticipatory bail petition, the court held the application infructuous as the petitioner is in custody for another case. No substantive ruling was made on the merits.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc. No. M-18777 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 18.8.2009
Daljinder Singh @ Prince
.. Petitioner
v.
State of Punjab
.. Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL
Present: Mr. Satnam Singh, Advocate for Mr. G. S. Kaura, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. A. S. Brar, Sr. DAG, Punjab.
Mr. S. S. Rangi, Advocate for the complainant.
Rajesh Bindal J.
Learned counsel for the State submits that the petitioner is presently in custody at Sub Jail, Malerkotla in some other case.
In view of this fact, the present petition for anticipatory bail is rendered infructuous. Ordered accordingly.
(Rajesh Bindal) Judge
18.8.2009 mk
Daljinder Singh @ Prince
State of Punjab
Rajesh Bindal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
