Allowed

Indermohan Singh v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC5 Jul 2012CRM-M/10274/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed an oral order making a previous notice of motion absolute. The petitioner, a proclaimed offender in a cheque bounce case, was ordered to deposit Rs.35,000/- draft and Rs.5,000/- costs with the trial court to get interim bail pending settlement.

What did the court decide?

Order dated 10.04.2012 made absolute; petitioner directed to deposit Rs.35,000/- draft and Rs.5,000/- costs with trial court; released on bail subject to satisfaction of arresting officer.

Indermohan Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr. — Cheque Dishonour | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

Crl. Misc. No.M-10274 of 2012

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Crl. Misc. No.M-10274 of 2012 Date of Decision : July 05, 2012

Indermohan Singh

.... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and another

¶9

.... Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARAMJEET SINGH

¶11

Present:Mr. Abhishek Vig, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

Ms. Jaspreet Kaur, AAG, Punjab None for respondent No.2.

¶13

PARAMJEET SINGH, J. (ORAL)

¶14

This is a petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of concession of pre-arrest bail to petitioner in case FIR No.1486 dated 14.10.2010 under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act titled as Mukhtiar Singh Dhillon Vs. Indermohan Singh (Annexure P-1), pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Patiala, wherein petitioner has been declared as proclaimed offender.

¶15

On 10.04.2012, a coordinate Bench of this Court passed the following order:-

¶16

“The petitioner is a proclaimed offender and has not put in

¶17

Crl. Misc. No.M-10274 of 2012

¶18

-2-

¶19

appearance in spite of various efforts made by the trial Court. The benefit of anticipatory bail is not liable to be extended to the petitioner but in view of the submission made by the counsel for the petitioner that he is willing to settle the dispute with respondent No.2, notice of motion is being issued. The petitioner shall bring a draft of Rs.35,000/- in favour of respondent No.2 on the next date of hearing and he shall also be liable to deposit a sum of Rs.5000/- as costs of litigation which shall be detailed on the next date of hearing. Notice of motion for 24.04.2012.

¶20

In the meanwhile, the petitioner shall be released on bail subject to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer.”

¶21

Despite service none is present on behalf of respondent No.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is having draft of Rs.35,000/- and petitioner is ready to pay Rs.5000/- also.

¶22

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, petitioner is directed to deposit the same before the trial Court and the order passed by this Court on April 10, 2012 is made absolute.

¶23

Disposed of.

¶24

(PARAMJEET SINGH) JUDGE

¶25

05.07.2012 vcgarg

Indermohan Singh v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indermohan Singh v. State of Punjab and Anr.

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

Rajwant Kaur Vs R.S. Patial and Others

Jasvir @ Jassu Vs State of Haryana

Surender @ Samunder Vs State of Haryana

Faquiria @ Bundu Vs State of Punjab and Others

Surender Pal @ Kaka etc. Vs State of Haryana

Balwinder @ Bindu @ Amandeep Vs State of Punjab