Petitioner sought anticipatory bail under Sections 5/68 of Copyright Act / 420/120-B IPC. Court held interim bail granted on April 24, 2012, absolute after petitioner joined investigation. Petition disposed of.
Interim bail granted vide order dated 24.4.2012 made absolute; petition disposed of.
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.
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
Criminal Misc. M No.11313 of 2012 (O&M) Date of decision: 07.11.2012
Gurdev Singh Bhullar
......Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
.......Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA
Present: Mr.Mohinder Kumar,Advocate and Mr.H.S.Shergill,Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.A.S.Grewal,Addl.A.G.Punjab
Mr.Vikram Chaudhary, Advocate for the complainant
SABINA, J.
This petition has been filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.41 dated 24.8.2011, under Sections 37,51.52-A,63,68-A of the Copy Right Act,1957 and Section 420/120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station D Division, Amritsar(Annexure P1).
While issuing notice of motion, the following order was passed by this Court on 24.4.2012 :-
“Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is running a cable network under the name of M/s God father Communications and under contract,it is broadcasting the signals of various channels to the consumers. According to him, in August, 2011, Sandeep Kumar claiming himself to be authorized person of MSM Discovery Pvt. Ltd. has lodged the FIR on the allegations
Criminal Misc. M No.11313 of 2012 (O&M) -2-
that the petitioner is illegally transmitting the signals of the company in unauthorized manner. According to him, a month thereafter, the company renewed its contract with the petitioner. He has further submitted that if the petitioner had been committing any such violation, the company could refrain from renewing the agreement. According to him, renewal of the agreement itself shows that the allegations are false,.
Notice of motion for 24.05.2012.
In the meanwhile, if the petitioner is sought to be arrested,he shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of the arresting/investigating officer subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438 sub section 2 clauses(i)(ii) and (iii) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.”
Learned State counsel, on instructions from Sub Inspector Kulbir Singh, has submitted that the petitioner has joined investigation in terms of the order reproduced above.
Accordingly, the interim bail granted to the petitioner by
this Court vide order 24.4.2012 is made absolute.
Petition stands disposed of accordingly.
(SABINA) JUDGE
November 07, 2012
arya
1 issue framed by the court
Whether interim anticipatory bail should be made absolute upon joining investigation.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Gurdev Singh Bhullar
State of Punjab
SABINA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
