Allowed

Swaran Kaur v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC6 Aug 2010CRM-M/9008/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab & Haryana granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. She was a lady who had joined the investigation and was not needed for further interrogation. The order was made subject to standard conditions and validity till the filing of the final report.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions of availability for interrogation, no inducement of witnesses, and no departure from India without permission.

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

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH

¶2

Criminal Miscellaneous No. M-9008 of 2010 Date of Decision: August 06, 2010

Swaran Kaur

.....PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

State of Punjab

.....RESPONDENT(S)

. . .

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA

¶11

PRESENT: - Mr. Rahul Rampal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Charu Tuli, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.

¶12

. . .

¶13

AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral)

¶14

This petition has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.256 dated 1.12.2009 under Sections 447, 511, 457, 380 IPC registered with Police Station, Haibowal, District Ludhiana. 2. Learned counsel for the respondentState, on instructions from Head Constable Jatinder Singh, states that the petitioner has joined investigation and is no more required for further interrogation.

¶15

Crl. Misc. No. M-9008 of 2010 [2]

¶16

Considering the fact that petitioner has joined investigation and petitioner is a lady, this petition is allowed. 4. Order dated 29.3.2010 is hereby made absolute and it is directed that in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing of bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting/Investigating Officer, subject to the following conditions:-

¶17

“(i) The petitioner shall make herself available for interrogation as and when required;

¶18

(ii) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; and

¶19

(iii) The petitioner shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.”

¶20

This order shall enure till 15 days after the filing of final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. within which period, the petitioner shall be required to seek regular bail.

¶21

(AJAI LAMBA)

¶22

August 06, 2010 JUDGE avin

¶23

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶24

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

Swaran Kaur v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Swaran Kaur 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

Harsimran Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab Roadways Workers Union Vs State of Punjab & Anr.

Manjit Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Rakesh Kumar Vs State of Punjab

Nimrat Kaur and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Kulwinder Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.