Dismissed

Makhna & Anr. v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC5 Apr 2013CRM-M/10219/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-judge order dismissing a petition for anticipatory bail. The High Court rejected the claim that police erroneously abandoned the investigation after initial findings of suicide, holding that the dying declaration remained valid and arrests were being pursued.

What did the court decide?

The petition for anticipatory bail was dismissed; the pending Criminal Misc. Application stands disposed of.

Makhna & Anr. Vs State of Punjab — Cheating and Forgery | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

CRM-M No. 10219 of 2013(O&M)

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM-M No. 10219 of 2013(O&M) Date of Decision: 05.04.2013

¶5

Makhna and another

¶6

........Petitioners

¶7

versus

¶8

State of Punjab

¶9

......... Respondent

¶10

CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Tewari

¶11

Present: Mr. Anshul Verma , Advocate

¶12

for the petitioners.

¶13

Mr.K.S.Pannu, DAG, Punjab.

¶14

¶15

Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶16

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶17

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶18

Ajay Tewari, J. (Oral):

¶19

This is a petition for anticipatory bail filed in case bearing FIR

¶20

No. 56 dated 12.09.2012 under Sections 302/307/34 IPC, registered at Police Station Taragarh, District Pathankot.

¶21

On 01.04.2013 the following contention was noticed:-

¶22

“Learned counsel has argued that even though the petitioners are sought to be implicated on the dying declaration, yet on the initial investigation by the police, it was brought out that the petitioners were not present on the spot and in fact the complainant-deceased had committed suicide and that is why the police did not even try to arrest the petitioners for a period of more than six months and now because of pressure being put

¶23

CRM-M No. 10219 of 2013(O&M)

¶24

¶25

by the family of the deceased, the police has started making efforts to arrest the petitioners.”

¶26

Today learned DAG states that the assertion that the police did

¶27

not try to arrest the petitioners is wrong and as per the record of the police they have been repeatedly raiding the house/s of the petitioners. It is also denied that the police ever reached the conclusion that the petitioners were not present at the spot or that the deceased had committed suicide. At this stage the dying declaration cannot be ignored.

¶28

Consequently the petition is dismissed.

¶29

Since the main case has been decided, the pending Criminal

¶30

Misc. Application, if any, also stands disposed of.

¶31

(AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE

¶32

April 05, 2013 sunita

Makhna & Anr. v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Makhna & Anr. 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hanif Khan and Anr. Vs Ali Mohammad Alias Alim

Karanjit Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Satnam Singh Vs State of Punjab

Abhinandan Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Rajni Rani and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Sangeeta Rani & Anr. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.