This court confirmed an interim anticipatory bail order granted earlier by a co-ordinate bench to the petitioner, finding no case for arrest or custodial interrogation as the petitioner had joined the investigation.
Interim anticipatory bail order dated 26.5.2010 confirmed subject to conditions of Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
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.
Criminal Misc.No. M- 13861 of 2010
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc.No. M- 13861 of 2010 Date of decision:- 9.7.2010
Surinder Singh
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA
Present:Mr. G.N. Malik, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. K.D. Sachdeva, Addl.A.G. Punjab
RAM CHAND GUPTA J.(Oral)
The present petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.53 dated 2.4.2010, under Sections 420 and 120-B IPC and under Section 7 of Essential Commodities Act, registered at Police Station Malout City, District Muktsar.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record carefully.
Co-ordinate Bench of this Court while issuing notice of motion, passed the following order:-
“The Counsel for the respondent-State, seeks a date, on the ground that the Investigating Officer with the file, has not come present. The prayer is allowed.
In the interest of justice, adjourned to 09.07.2010, for arguments.
In the meanwhile, in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on interim anticipatory bail, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, on his furnishing bail bonds, in the adequate sum, subject to the compliance of the conditions contained in Section 439(2) Cr.P.C.”
It has been stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that the
Criminal Misc.No. M- 13861 of 2010
-2-
petitioner has joined the investigation in pursuance of the said order.
It has been stated by learned counsel for the respondent-State that the petitioner has joined the investigation and is no more required for any custodial interrogation.
There are no allegations on behalf of the State that the petitioner is likely to abscond or that he is likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts in the Court, if released on bail.
In view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, order dated 26.5.2010, granting interim bail to the petitioner Surinder Singh, is, hereby confirmed subject to the compliance of conditions contained in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
The present petition stands disposed of accordingly.
July 09, 2010 ( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) vj JUDGE
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the interim anticipatory bail granted by a co-ordinate bench should be confirmed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. given the petitioner's cooperation in investigation.
3 provisions across 1 enactments
Surinder Singh
State of Punjab
RAM CHAND GUPTA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
