The court dismissed a fresh application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. No change in circumstances was found following the dismissal of an identical petition filed earlier on 28.8.2009.
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
CRM-M-25475 of 2009
DATE OF DECISION: 09.10.2009
Rajinder Kaur and others . . . . Petitioners
VS.
State of Punjab and others . . . . Respondents
CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN
****
Present: Mr.H.S. Sirohi, Advocate for the petitioners.
RAKESH KUMAR JAIN J.
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.10/2009 dated 21.2.2009 under Sections 363, 366, 376, 120-B IPC at Police Station Dera Baba Nanak, Police District Batala, District Gurdaspur.
All the petitioners had earlier filed Crl. Misc. No.M13543 of 2009 titled as “Rajinder Kaur and others Vs. State of Punjab”, which has been dismissed by this Court by a detailed order on 28.8.2009.
The present petition is again filed by the petitioners on the basis of an affidavit (Annexure P-4).
After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners, I do not find any change in circumstance for the purpose of considering the bail application of the petitioners. Hence, the same is hereby dismissed.
(RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) JUDGE
OCTOBER 09, 2009 vivek
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted given the dismissal of an identical earlier petition.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Rajinder Kaur and others
State of Punjab and others
Rakesh Kumar Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
