Single judge disposed of a bail application seeking withdrawal of funds deposited for interim anticipatory bail. Court dismissed the petition noting the petitioner failed to satisfy the decree amount condition after the attached civil suit was decreed for a higher sum.
Petition for withdrawal of deposited amount was 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.
1
Crl. Misc. No. M-36534 of 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Crl. Misc. No. M-36534 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: May 20, 2010
Gagan Verma
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and another
...Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH
Present: Mr. Rajiv Joshi, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. AS Brar, Sr. DAG, Punjab, for respondent No.1.
Mr. Sanjay Vij, Advocate, for respondent No.2.
GURDEV SINGH, J.
Heard.
It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner be permitted to withdraw the amount deposited by him, which was made a condition precedent for grant of anticipatory bail, and that he be allowed to avail his remedy before the trial court itself.
It was the petitioner himself who presented before the bench of Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajive Bhalla, that the petitioner had instructed his brother to pay the amount due under the cheque and left for America and that amount was not paid as a result of which he was declared as proclaimed offender. The offer was from the side of the petitioner himself that he was ready to deposit the sum of Rs. 50,000/- with simple interest @ 6% p.a. Thereafter, the interim anticipatory bail was granted to him, subject to
Crl. Misc. No. M-36534 of 2009 2 deposit of that amount. On the next date, it was submitted that the petitioner has already deposited Rs. 80,500/- with the trial court. However, counsel for respondent No.2 came out with the plea that the civil suit, which was filed in respect of the cheque amount, was decreed for Rs. 1,89,603/- alongwith future interest @ 6% per annum. Thereafter, interim anticipatory bail was ordered to continue, subject to the deposit of the decreetal amount.
That condition has not been satisfied by the petitioner.
The prayer of the petitioner for withdrawal of the amount deposited by him with the trial court, which was deposited by way of condition precedent for the grant of interim anticipatory bail, itself is a ground for dismissing this petition.
The petition is dismissed accordingly.
May 20, 2010 (GURDEV SINGH ) prem JUDGE
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to withdraw the amount deposited as a condition precedent for interim anticipatory bail.
Whether the petition to withdraw deposited funds should be dismissed given petitioner's failure to satisfy the updated decree amount.
Gagan Verma
State of Punjab
Another
GURDEV SINGH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
