Allowed

Rachhpal v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC7 May 2013CRM-M/12422/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a case involving cheating and forgery offences. The court noted the petitioner's lack of overt acts, his cooperation in investigations, and the delay in trial, making the interim bail absolute subject to compliance of statutory conditions.

What did the court decide?

The petition for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. was accepted, and the interim bail order was made absolute subject to conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

Rachhpal Vs State of Punjab — Cheating and Forgery | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

¶2

CRM No.M-12422 of 2013(O&M)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM No.M-12422 of 2013(O&M) Date of Decision:07.05.2013

¶5

Rachhpal Singh .....Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Punjab .....Respondent

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR.

¶9

Present: Ms.Pushpinder Kaur, Advocate, for Ms.G.K.Mann, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶10

Mr.RPS Sidhu, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, for the respondent-State.

¶11

¶12

MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR , J.(oral)

¶13

Petitioner-Rachhpal Singh son of Gian Singh, has preferred the instant petition for the grant of anticipatory bail in a case registered against him along with his other co-accused, namely, Jagtar Singh @ Jugraj Singh son of Amar Singh and others, by virtue of FIR No.07 dated 08.01.2011, for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 467, 471 and 120-B IPC, by the police of Police Station Ajnala, District Amritsar(Rural), invoking the provisions of Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶14

Notice of the petition was issued to the State.

¶15

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, going through the record with their valuable help and after considering the

¶16

entire matter deeply, to my mind, the present petition for anticipatory bail deserves to be accepted in this context.

¶17

CRM No.M-12422 of 2013(O&M) 2

¶18

It is not a matter of dispute that, petitioner-Rachhpal Singh is stated to have attested the agreement to sell. No other role or overt-act is attributed to him. Jagtar Singh @ Jugraj Singh, co-accused of the petitioner, has already been granted the concession of anticipatory bail by this Court, by way of order dated 20.07.2012 in CRM No.M-25441 of 2011. Therefore, I see no reason not to extend the same benefit of anticipatory bail to the present petitioner under the same set of circumstances.

¶19

Moreover, interim anticipatory bail was granted, to enable the petitioner to join the investigation by this Court, by means of order dated April 22, 2013. At this stage, on the instructions from ASI Pargat Singh, learned State Counsel has acknowledged the factual matrix and submitted that the petitioner has already joined the investigation. He is no longer required for further interrogation, at this stage. There is no history of his previous involvement in any other criminal case. All the offences alleged against the accused are triable by the Court of Magistrate. Even, since the police has not submitted the final police report(challan), so, the conclusion of trial will naturally take a long time. 6. In the light of aforesaid reasons and taking into consideration the totality of other facts and circumstances, emanating from the record, as discussed here-in-above, the instant petition for anticipatory bail is accepted. The interim bail already granted to the petitioner by this Court, vide order dated April 22, 2013, is hereby made absolute, subject to the compliance of the conditions, as contemplated under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

¶20

CRM No.M-12422 of 2013(O&M) 3

¶21

Needless to mention that, in case, the petitioner does not cooperate or join the investigation, the prosecution would be at liberty to move a petition for cancellation of his bail, in this respect.

¶22

May 07, 2013 ( M EHINDER S INGH S ULLAR) seema JUDGE

Rachhpal v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rachhpal 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Santokh Singh Vs State of Punjab

Public Information Officer Vs State Information Commissioner Punjab

M/S Kaur Sain Spinners Ltd. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Rajbir Singh Vs State of Haryana and Anr.

Rajinder Kumar Vs State of Punjab

Dewan Chand Vs Punjab State etc.