On a petition under Section 438 CrPC for anticipatory bail, the Court made the earlier bail order absolute after the State counsel informed that the petitioner had joined the investigation.
The order dated 29.04.2010 granting anticipatory bail was made absolute.
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 No. M 12308 of 2010 Date of decision: 26.10.2010
Ram Dhari
........ Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana
.......Respondent(s)
Coram: Hon'ble Ms Justice Nirmaljit Kaur
-.-
Present: Mr. Surender Deswal, Advocate for the petitioner
Mr. Kartar Singh, DAG, Haryana for the respondent State
Mr. Rajesh Dhiman, Advocate for the complainant
Nirmaljit Kaur, J. (Oral)
This is a petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 798 dated 03.12.2009 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 506, 120-B of Indian Penal Code, P S Civil Line, Karnal.
Learned State counsel, on instructions states that the petitioner has since joined the investigation.
In view of the above, the order dated 29.04.2010 passed by this Court is made absolute.
(Nirmaljit Kaur) Judge
26.10.2010 mohan
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be made absolute upon the petitioner joining the investigation.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ram Dhari
State of Haryana
Nirmaljit Kaur
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
