Allowed

Ashwani Kumar Julka @ Brar v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC13 Oct 2011CRM-M/11456/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order grants regular bail to two petitioners accused of cheating who had been in custody for about eight months. The court directed their release on furnishing bail bonds to the Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, Amritsar, as the case is triable by a Magistrate and charges were not framed.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to be released on furnishing of bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, Amritsar.

Ashwani Kumar Julka @ Brar Vs State of Punjab — Cheating and Forgery | Punjab & Haryana HC (2011)

¶1

Criminal Misc.-M No. 11456 of 2011 [1]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

Date of decision: 13.10.2011

¶4

(1) Criminal Misc.-M No. 11456 of 2011 (O&M)

¶5

Ashwani Kumar Julka @ Brar

.. Petitioner

Vs.

State of Punjab

.. Respondent

(2) Criminal Misc.-M No. 19295 of 2011 (O&M)

Julius Sammual

.. Petitioner

Vs.

State of Punjab .. Respondent

¶15

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL

¶16

Present: Mr. Kanwaljit Singh, Senior Advocate with Ms. Sukhwinder Kaur, Advocate for petitioner-Ashwani Kumar Julka.

¶17

Mr. P. L. Singla, Advocate for petitioner-Julius Sammual.

¶18

Mr. K. S. Pannu, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.

¶19

Rajesh Bindal J.

¶20

This order will dispose of the above mentioned two petitions, as the same arise out of one FIR.

¶21

Prayer in the present petitions is for grant of regular bail to the petitioners, who are accused in FIR No. 17 dated 10.2.2011, registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station, Chatiwind, District Amritsar.

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitionerAshwani Kumar Julka is in custody since 10.2.2011, whereas petitionerJulius Sammual is in custody since 16.2.2011. Challan has already been

¶23

Criminal Misc.-M No. 11456 of 2011 [2]

¶24

presented, however, charges have not been framed till date. As the case is triable by Magistrate, considering the period of custody, which is about eight months, the petitioners be released on regular bail.

¶25

Learned counsel for the State submitted that considering the allegations against the petitioners in the FIR, where they had cheated innocent people by taking money for sending them abroad, they do not deserve concession of bail.

¶26

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering that the petitioners are in custody for the last about 8 months and the case is triable by Magistrate, they are directed to be released on furnishing of bail bonds to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, Amritsar.

¶27

The petitions stand disposed of.

¶28

(Rajesh Bindal)

¶29

Judge

¶30

13.10.2011 mk

Ashwani Kumar Julka @ Brar v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashwani Kumar Julka @ Brar 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

Lakhwinder Ram & Anr. Vs State of Punjab & Anr.

Swaran Singh Vs State of Punjab

Pankaj Kumar Vs State of Punjab

Harprabhpal Singh Vs Union of India & Ors.

Gurmukh Singh Vs State of Punjab

Julius Sammual Vs State of Punjab