The Court disposed of the petition and made the earlier order granting bail absolute. The Court noted the Investigating Officer stated the petitioner was innocent and not wanted by the police, with no new evidence collected against her.
The petition was disposed of and the order dated 11.6.2010 was made absolute.
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.
CRM-M No.16736 of 2010
1
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh.
CRM-M No.16736 of 2010 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 09.02.2011
Balbir Kaur
....Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
....Respondents.
Coram:- Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Singh
Present: Mr. C.S. Bagri, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. K.D. Sachdeva, Addl. A.G., Punjab for the State.
Mr. J.S. Chahal, Advocate for the complainant.
Alok Singh, J (Oral).
The District and Sessions Judge in his order dated 18.4.2009 passed in Bail Application No.231 of 2009 had observed that the Investigating Officer Kailash Chander from Police Station, Jalandhar has stated that the applicant Balbir Kaur is not wanted in this case by the police as she was found innocent during the enquiry.
On being asked repeatedly neither ASI Rajpal Singh nor the
CRM-M No.16736 of 2010
2
Additional Advocate General, Punjab, are able to tell the Court as to what evidence was collected against the petitioner after 18.4.2009, suggesting involvement of the petitioner in the offence.
Learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab on the instructions of the Investigating Officer has repeatedly argued that address given by the petitioner is wrong and she was not residing at the address given in the petition. However, he is not able to satisfy the Court as to what evidence was collected against the petitioner after 18.4.2009.
This Court fails to understand that once the Investigating Officer has stated before the Sessions Judge that the petitioner is not involved in the offence, on what basis the State/prosecution is seeking dismissal of the bail application.
Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that petitioner has not been released on bail by the Arresting Officer pursuant to the order dated 11.6.2010 because there was no evidence against the petitioner and she was not found involved in the commission of the offence.
In view of the above facts, present petition is disposed of making the order dated 11.6.2010 absolute.
( Alok Singh ) Judge
09.02.2011 sk.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the order of bail in Bail Application No.231 of 2009 should be made absolute given the Investigating Officer's statement that the petitioner is not wanted.
Whether the petitioner should be released on bail considering the lack of evidence collected against her after 18.4.2009.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Balbir Kaur
State of Punjab
Alok Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
