Allowed

Lakhwinder Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC23 Oct 2013CRM-M/17896/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Criminal Miscellaneous matter, the Punjab and Haryana High Court granted interim anticipatory bail to Petitioner No. 1. The Court observed that the dispute was settled, investigation joined, and the accused was not required for custodial interrogation, thus making the interim bail order absolute without expressing an opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

The interim bail order in favour of Lakhwinder Singh dated 28.05.2013 was made absolute.

Lakhwinder Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab — Cheating and Forgery | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

CRM No.M-17896 of 2013

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Crl. Misc. No. M- 17896 of 2013(O&M) Date of Decision: October 23, 2013.

¶5

Lakhwinder Singh and another

...... PETITIONER(s)

Versus

State of Punjab

...... RESPONDENT (s)

¶10

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

¶11

Present: Mr. Gur Avtar Singh Mann, Advocate, for the petitioners.

¶12

Mrs. Simsi Dhir Malhotra, DAG, Punjab.

¶13

Mr. BD Sharma, Advocate, for the complainant.

¶14

¶15

RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral)

¶16

The present petition has been filed for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure in FIR no.18 dated 10.04.2013, under Sections 420/120B IPC, registered at police station Hariana, District Hoshiarpur.

¶17

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, Hoshiarpur dismissing anticipatory bail

¶18

Singh Omkar 2013.10.25 10:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh

¶19

CRM No.M-17896 of 2013

¶20

¶21

application filed on behalf of the petitioners.

¶22

This Court while issuing notice of motion on 28.05.2013 passed the following order:-

¶23

“Contends that he does not want to press this petition on behalf of petitioner No.2-Mangal Singh and the same may be dismissed as such.

¶24

Hence present petition qua petitioner no.2-Mangal Singh is dismissed as withdrawn.

¶25

Further contends that petitioner no.1-Lakhwinder Singh, is husband of main accused-Harjeet Kaur and that dispute has since been settled and petitioner no.1 had already returned a sum of `7.00 lacs vide Annexure P9 to the complainant and that he is ready to return the remaining amount as per the compromise. Further contends that on similar facts, co-accused have already been granted interim bail by this Court.

¶26

Notice of motion to Advocate General, Punjab, for 30.7.2013.

¶27

However, in the meantime, petitioner no.1-Lakhwinder Singh 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.”

¶28

It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioner no.1 -Lakhwinder Singh has already joined the investigation pursuant to said order dated 28.05.2013. It is further contended that dispute has since been settled between the parties and complainant has already received 18 lacs. He has also handed over one post-dated cheque for 7 lacs to complainant.

¶29

Singh Omkar 2013.10.25 10:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh

¶30

CRM No.M-17896 of 2013

¶31

¶32

It has also been stated by learned counsel for the State, on instruction from ASI Akshpal Singh, that petitioner has joined the investigation and that he is no more required for any custodial interrogation. Bail application is not opposed.

¶33

It has been stated by learned counsel for complainant that the cheque is dated 20.01.2014 and the same is yet to be honourned.

¶34

There are no allegations on behalf of the State that petitioner no.1 is likely to abscond or that he is likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts in the Court, if released on bail.

¶35

Petitioner no.1 has already joined the investigation and is not required for custodial interrogation by the State. Hence, in view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the anticipatory bail application qua petitioner no.1 -Lakhwinder Singh is accepted and order dated 28.05.2013 granting interim bail in his favour is, hereby, made absolute subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

¶36

The present petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶37

October 23, 2013. ‘om’

¶38

( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) JUDGE

¶39

Singh Omkar 2013.10.25 10:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh

Lakhwinder Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lakhwinder Singh and Ors. 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

Jasbir Singh and Ors. Vs State of Haryana

Bhupinder Singh etc. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Sat Pal and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Harjeet Kaur and Ors. Vs State of Punjab

Charan Singh Jaswal & Anr. Vs State of Punjab

Moidur Rehman Vs U.T. Chandigarh and Anr.