The petitioner's application for anticipatory bail was dismissed. The court noted the petitioner had been declared a proclaimed offender and referenced reasons from a 2007 order indicating interrogation was required.
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.-M No.20441 of 2010
Rubal Agnihotri
Vs.
State of Punjab
Present: Ms.Monika Goyal, Advocate, for the petitioner.
****
RANJIT SINGH, J.
The anticipatory bail of the petitioner was dismissed in the year 2007. He has subsequently been declared as a proclaimed offender. While dismissing the earlier application for anticipatory bail, it was observed that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is needed. No case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out.
Dismissed.
July 22, 2010 ramesh
( RANJIT SINGH ) JUDGE
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petition for grant of anticipatory bail should be allowed given that the petitioner is a proclaimed offender and prior opinions indicated custodial interrogation is needed?
Rubal Agnihotri
State of Punjab
RANJIT SINGH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
