Petitioner sought anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC. The court dismissed the petition, holding grounds were not made out due to failure to join investigation and the petitioner's arrest in another case.
Petition for anticipatory bail dismissed.
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
Crl. Misc. No. M-17658 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: August 27, 2010
Sachin
........Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
.......Respondent
CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA
Present: Mr. Eklavya Darshi, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Ms. Rajni Gupta, Addl. A.G. Punjab.
SABINA, J.
Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.158 dated 9.4.2010, under Sections 323/341/506/148/149 of the Indian Penal Code and 25 of the Arms Act, 1959, Police Station Division No.5, Civil Lines, Ludhiana.
Learned State counsel, who is assisted by HC Jaspal Singh, has submitted that the petitioner has failed to join investigation in terms of the order dated 4.8.2010 and moreover he has been arrested in another criminal case.
The fact that the petitioner has been arrested in another criminal case has not been denied by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
Accordingly, no ground for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is
made out.
Dismissed.
(SABINA) August 27, 2010 JUDGE Anand
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner has made out a ground for the grant of anticipatory bail given failure to join investigation and arrest in another case.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Sachin
State of Punjab
Sabina
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
