Allowed

Jagir Singh v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC10 Aug 2011CRM-M/18353/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application arising from a ₹7.1 lakh fraud case where a panchayati compromise was initially alleged, the court allowed pre-arrest bail after the petitioner deposited ₹4.75 lakhs and a later compromise was filed. The Tribunal directed the release of deposited funds to the complainant.

What did the court decide?

Grant of bail; direction to Registrar to release ₹4,75,000/- deposited by petitioner to the complainant.

Jagir Singh Vs State of Punjab — Cheque Dishonour | Punjab & Haryana HC (2011)

¶1

Criminal Misc. No.M-18353 of 2011

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Criminal Misc. No.M-18353 of 2011 Date of Decision : 10.08.2011

Jagir Singh

....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

.....Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN

¶11

Present: Ms.Sushma Chopra Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.A.S.Rai, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Mr.Vivek Goel Advocate for the complainant.

¶12

¶13

Rakesh Kumar Jain, J.(Oral)

¶14

This is an application for pre-arrest bail in case FIR No.52 dated 17.05.2011, under Sections 420, 193, 506 IPC registered at Police Station Dharamkot, District Moga.

¶15

The allegations in the FIR are that the petitioner has committed a fraud of 7,10,000/- and has refused to pay it even on demand. It is alleged that with the intervention of the respectables, a Panchayati compromise was effected on 30.3.2011 as per which, the complainant had agreed to accept 4,75,000/from the petitioner in lumpsum against his all claims.

¶16

At the time of notice of motion on 06.06.2011, counsel for the petitioner had submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to deposit the amount of 4,75,000/- with the Registrar within two days. On 08.06.2011, the petitioner informed that 4,75,000/- has been deposited with the Registry of this Court.

¶17

In view thereof, notice of motion was issued and arrest of the petitioner was stayed. Thereafter, on 05.08.2011 when the petitioner was present, he agreed to pay ` 15,000/- to the complainant which is allegedly spent on this litigation. This amount was accepted by the complainant.

¶18

Learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that though, comprehensive compromise could not be produced on record but counsel for the petitioner has today produced on record a compromise dated 05.08.2011 duly

¶19

Criminal Misc. No.M-18353 of 2011

¶20

¶21

signed by the petitioner-Jagir Singh and complainant-Sanjeev Kumar @ Bobby and one Ajay Pal Singh (co-accused). The compromise is taken on record as Annexure C-1.

¶22

In view of the above, the order dated 08.06.201 is hereby made absolute.

¶23

Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the amount of 4,75,000/- which is deposited with Registrar may be released to the complainant. Hence, the Registry is directed to release sum of 4,75,000/- to the complainant (Sanjeev Kumar) after satisfaction of his identity through his counsel Sh.Vivek Goyal, within a period of 10 days from the date of passing of this order.

¶24

At this stage, the complainant has returned the cheque dated 10.12.2010 amounting to ` 7,10,000/- to the counsel for the petitioner.

¶25

Petition is disposed of.

¶26

(RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) 10^th August, 2011. JUDGE

¶27

Seema -II

Jagir Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jagir Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mahadev Gupta and Others Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Sunny @ Kala Vs State of Haryana

Surinder Singh Vs State of Punjab

Ramesh @ Bora Vs State of Haryana

Satya Devi Vs State of Punjab

Kashmir Singh Vs State of Punjab