Allowed

Parkash Kaur Sharma v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC10 Aug 2010CRM-M/22179/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana allowed a petition for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The petitioner was not alleged in the FIR but had joined the investigation. The court noted no allegation against her and granted bail citing her status as a woman.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to joining investigation and complying with Section 438(2) conditions.

Parkash Kaur Sharma Vs State of Punjab — Anticipatory Bail | Punjab & Haryana HC (2010)

¶1

Crl. Misc. No.M-22179 of 2010

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶4

Crl. Misc. No.M-22179 of 2010 Date of Decision: 13.08.2010

Parkash Kaur Sharma

....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM : Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur

¶11

Present:Mr. Kanwaljit Singh, Sr. Advocate with Mr. S.S. Rangi, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr. K.S. Pannu, D.A.G., Punjab for the respondent-State.

¶13

Mr. Vikas Bali, Advocate and Mr. Rajesh Chaudhary, Advocate for the complainant.

¶14

¶15

Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment ?

¶16

To be referred to the Reporters or not ?

¶17

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ?

¶18

¶19

NIRMALJIT KAUR, J.

¶20

This is a petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.137 dated 27.05.2010 under Sections 406, 420 and 120-B IPC registered at Police Station City Khanna, District Ludhiana.

¶21

There is no allegation in the FIR against the present petitioner. In fact, her name does not appear in the FIR. Interim bail was granted to the petitioner by the trial Court while noticing the above facts. Accordingly, she has also joined the investigation. Her bail application has been dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana vide Order dated

¶22

¶23

Crl. Misc. No.M-22179 of 2010

¶24

21.07.2010 on the ground that Rs.15 lacs were handed over to Anish Sharma and to her mother Parkash Kaur i.e. the present petitioner, whereas, there is no such allegation levelled by the complainant in the FIR that any amount was ever handed over to the petitioner. Besides the fact that there is no allegation against her, the petitioner also deserves the concession of anticipatory bail in the facts of the present case, being a woman.

¶25

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner, if arrested, shall be released on interim bail to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to the condition that the petitioner shall join investigation as and when required by the police and shall comply with conditions specified in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

¶26

(NIRMALJIT KAUR) JUDGE

¶27

13.08.2010 gurpreet

Parkash Kaur Sharma v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parkash Kaur Sharma v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bachna Ram & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Municipal Committee, Tarauri Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Harbans Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Minesh Devendra Shah@Manish Shah Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Gurmit Singh & Ors. Vs Chandigarh Administration & Anr.

Asha Rani & Anr. Vs State of Haryana & Ors.