Allowed

Simarjit Kaur and Another v. State of Punjab and Another

Punjab & Haryana HC9 Apr 2013CRM-M/1969/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners granted pre-arrest bail in a complaint under the PCPNDT Act alleging abortion. The High Court found the interim bail made on January 23, 2013, should be converted to absolute bail as the case is a complaint and interrogative stage is complete.

What did the court decide?

The petition is allowed; the interim anticipatory bail order dated 23 January 2013 is made absolute.

Simarjit Kaur and Another Vs State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Crl. Misc. No.M-1969 of 2013(O&M) Date of Decision: 09.04.2013

Simarjit Kaur & Anr.

... Petitioners

vs.

State of Punjab & Anr.

¶7

... Respondents

¶8

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJENDER SINGH MALIK

¶9

Present:Mr. Vivek Goel, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶10

Mr. Amit Chaudhry, DAG Punjab.

¶11

VIJENDER SINGH MALIK,J(ORAL)

¶12

Simarjit Kaur and Mohinder Kaur, the petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in a complaint case brought by District Appropriate Authority, Faridkot against the petitioners and others, for an offence punishable under sections 4,5 and 6 and rule 9 read with section 29 of the Pre-Conception and Pre Natal Diagnostic (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 and Rules 1996.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that earlier FIR was lodged on the allegations of causing abortion of Jaspreet Kaur by giving of blows. According to him, the said FIR was quashed by this court on the basis of compromise. According to him, now the complaint has been lodged by District Appropriate Authority, Faridkot and the petitioners have been summoned to stand trial. According to him, in pursuance of the

¶14

Crl. Misc. No.M-1969 of 2013 =2=

¶15

orders of this court dated 23.1.2013, the petitioners have appeared before the concerned court and have been admitted to interim bail.

¶16

Learned State counsel has nothing to say in the matter.

¶17

Petitioner no.1 is sister-in-law of Jaspreet Kaur and petitioner no.2 is sister of mother-in-law of the said woman, who suffered abortion. Regarding the same abortion, this case has been brought by way of a complaint and there is no stage of custodial interrogation of the case in a complaint case. The petitioners have already appeared before the court below and have been admitted to interim bail. In view of these circumstances, I find the petitioners to be entitled to pre-arrest bail. Consequently, the petition is allowed and orders dated 23.01.2013 granting interim anticipatory bail to the petitioners is made absolute.

¶18

April 09,2013 ( VIJENDER SINGH MALIK ) Jiten JUDGE

Simarjit Kaur and Another v. State of Punjab and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Simarjit Kaur and Another v. State of Punjab and Another

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

Mahinder Pal Vs State of Punjab

Inderjeet Singh Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Prem Parkash Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Rajinder Kaur Vs State of Punjab

Haneef Vs State of Haryana and Others

Deepak Sandhu and Anr. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.