Allowed

Amrik Singh v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC8 May 2012CRM-M/11412/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana accepted an anticipatory bail petition filed by Amrik Singh. The court held that since the petitioner had joined the investigation and faced no risk of absconding, the earlier interim bail order was made absolute subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

The anticipatory bail application was accepted and the interim bail order dated 24.04.2012 was made absolute subject to conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC.

Amrik Singh Vs State of Haryana — Cheating and Forgery | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Crl. Misc. No.M-11412 of 2012 (O&M)

¶3

Date of Decision: May 08, 2012.

Amrik Singh

...... PETITIONER(s)

Versus

State of Haryana

...... RESPONDENT (s)

¶9

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA

¶10

Present: Mr. J.S. Bedi, Advocate for for the petitioner.

¶11

Mr. Anmol Malik, A.A.G. Haryana.

¶12

¶13

RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral)

¶14

The present petition has been filed for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure in FIR No.400 dated 7.12.2010 under Sections 409, 465, 467, 468, 471, 420 read with Section 120-B of Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station Sector-5, Panchkula.

¶15

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record including the impugned order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Panchkula dismissing anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner.

¶16

This Court while issuing notice of motion on 24.04.2012 passed the following order:-

¶17

“Crl.M.No.23260 of 2012

¶18

CRM No.M-11412 of 2012

¶19

¶20

Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Crl.M.No.M-11412 of 2012

¶21

Contends that name of petitioner has not been mentioned in the FIR and that he came to know for the first time that he is wanted in this case when report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was filed against his nephew, who is co-accused in this case, namely, Jasbir Singh. Further contends that he is being implicated in this case on the plea that he is a witness in two of the sale deeds in favour of co-accused Deep Kaur and, however, it is contended that petitioner is having no concern with Deep Kaur and that she is not related to him in any manner and that he witnessed those sale deed as the said transactions were got finalised by him as property dealer. Further contends that he is not, in any way, involved in this case and that there is no evidence connecting him with this case and that he is ready to join the investigation.

¶22

Notice of motion to Advocate General, Haryana, for

¶23

8.5.2012.

¶24

However, in the meantime, petitioner is directed to join the investigation and in case he is arrested, he 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.”

¶25

It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has already joined the investigation pursuant to said order dated 24.4.2012.

¶26

It has also been stated by learned counsel for the State on the instructions from ASI Sanjay Kumar that petitioner has joined the investigation and that he is no more required for any custodial interrogation.

¶27

CRM No.M-11412 of 2012

¶28

¶29

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

¶30

Hence, in view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of petitioner Amrik Singh is accepted and order dated 24.4.2012 granting interim bail in favour of the petitioner is, hereby, made absolute subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

¶31

The present petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶32

( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) May 08, 2012. JUDGE Sachin M.

Amrik Singh v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amrik Singh v. State of Haryana

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

Chameli and Anr. Vs State of Haryana

Amarjit Kaur and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Another

Chaman Lal Vs State of Punjab

Nirmal Kumar @ Sabhu Vs State of Punjab

Vikramjit Singh Vs State of Punjab

Nazar Mohd. Vs State of Haryana