Allowed

Ramesh Kumar and Ors. v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC10 Dec 2012CRM-M/10140/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. allowed. Court converted interim bail granted on notice into absolute bail, finding no need for custodial interrogation, without expressing opinion on case merits, subject to statutory conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed and order of interim bail dated 16.4.2012 made absolute subject to conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

Ramesh Kumar and Ors. Vs State of… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

-1-

¶2

Crl.M.No.M-10140 of 2012(O&M)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶4

Crl.M.No.M-10140 of 2012(O&M) Date of Decision: December 10, 2012

¶5

Ramesh Kumar and others

.....Petitioners

State of Punjab

......Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA

¶11

Present: Mr.Mohinder Kumar, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶12

Mr.P.S.Paul, DAG, Punjab.

¶13

Mr.PBS Goraya, Advocate for the complainant.

¶14

......

¶15

RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral)

¶16

The present petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in case FIR No.73, dated 20.2.2012, Annexure P1, under Section 420 IPC, registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Amritsar City, Punjab.

¶17

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record carefully.

¶18

This Court while issuing notice of motion on 16.4.2012, passed the following order:

¶19

“Crl.M.No.21045 of 2012

¶20

Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions.

¶21

Crl.M.No.M-10140 of 2012

¶22

Contends that dispute, if any, is civil in nature and in fact petitioner no.1 had taken loan from the complainant and in the garb of the same, he got executed power of attorney and some other documents as security from petitioner no.1 and that

¶23

Crl.M.No.M-10140 of 2012(O&M)

¶24

-2-

¶25

petitioners are also paying interest amount on the said amount, as per agreement.

¶26

Notice of motion to Advocate General, Punjab, for 1.5.2012.

¶27

However, in the meantime, petitioners are directed to join the investigation and in case they are arrested, they shall be released on interim bail by the Arresting Officer to his satisfaction subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.”

¶28

It has been stated by learned counsel for the petitioners that pursuant to the said order, the petitioners have already joined the investigation.

¶29

It has been stated by learned State counsel as well, on instructions from, ASI Govind Pal, that the petitioners have joined the investigation and that they are no more required for any custodial interrogation by the police.

¶30

However, bail application has been opposed by learned counsel for the complainant.

¶31

There are no allegations on behalf of the State that petitioners are likely to abscond or that they are likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts in the Court, if released on bail.

¶32

In view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, order dated 16.4.2012, granting interim bail to petitioners-Ramesh Kumar, Om Parkash and Kiran, is, hereby made absolute subject to the compliance of conditions contained in Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C.

¶33

The present petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶34

(Ram Chand Gupta) Judge

¶35

10.12.2012

¶36

meenu

Ramesh Kumar and Ors. v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Kumar and Ors. 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

Sham Vs State of Haryana

Kailash Devi Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Angrej Singh Vs Financial Commissioner & Ors.

Sandesh Kumar Vs Tarlok Singh

Jagdev Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Rohit Pandey Vs State of Punjab