Allowed

Raghbir Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC2 Apr 2012CRM-M/4210/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an anticipatory bail petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the High Court observed that the petitioner had already been released on interim bail by the trial court following the court's earlier order. Consequently, the present petition was accepted, and interim bail was made absolute subject to furnishing fresh bonds to the trial court.

What did the court decide?

Interim bail granted in the previous order was made absolute, subject to furnishing fresh bail bonds to the trial court.

Raghbir Singh Vs State of Punjab & Anr. — Anticipatory Bail | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh

¶2

Criminal Misc. No. M- 4210 of 2012

¶3

Date of Decision: 2.4.2012

Raghbir Singh

... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and Another

¶8

... Respondents

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA.

¶10

Present: Ms. Monika Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶11

Ms. Jaspreet Kaur, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab ,for respondent No.1.

¶12

None for respondent No.2.

¶13

Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral)

¶14

This Court, on 21.2.2012, had passed the following order:-

¶15

“The present petition has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner in case arising out of complaint bearing No. 1012 dated 10.3.2008, under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ludhiana.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner was summoned in a private complaint, filed under Section 138 of the Act

¶17

Criminal Misc. No. M- 4210 of 2012

¶18

¶19

vide order dated 4.10.2008 (Annexure P2). It is submitted that the offence, for which the petitioner has been summoned, is bailable. It is contended that no service of summons was effected upon the petitioner and at his back, vide order dated 4.1.2012 (Annexure P4), he was declared as a Proclaimed Offender. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has filed a petition viz. Criminal Misc. No. M-3453 of 2012 seeking quashing of the complaint, summoning order and the order declaring him as a Proclaimed Offender, wherein notice of motion has been issued.

¶20

Issue notice of motion for 12.3.2012.

¶21

In case, the petitioner appears before the Summoning Court on or before 1.3.2012, he shall be released on interim bail.”

¶22

Office has reported that notice, issued to respondent No.2 on 19.3.2012, has been received back served but nobody has caused appearance on his behalf.

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed on record a certified copy of the order, passed by the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ludhiana, on 1.3.2012, which shows that the petitioner has complied with the order dated 21.2.2012 and he has been released on interim bail by the trial Court.

¶24

In view of the compliance of the order dated 21.2.2012, the

¶25

Criminal Misc. No. M- 4210 of 2012

¶26

¶27

present petition is accepted and interim bail, granted to the petitioner, is made absolute, subject to his furnishing fresh bail bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

¶28

(Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge

¶29

April 2, 2012 “DK”

Raghbir Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raghbir Singh v. State of Punjab & 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

Preet Pal Vs State of Punjab

Nikhil Bhatt Vs Ut of Chandigarh

Satish Kumar @ Sonu Vs State of Punjab

Nirwair Singh & Anr. Vs Dalbir Kaur

Sukhdev Singh @ Maghu and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Gopal Saini Alias Gopal Dass Vs State of Punjab