Allowed

Harmeet Singh & Anr. v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC1 Oct 2013CRM-M/22315/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought anticipatory bail under CrPC Section 438 in a case involving alleged attempt to murder and assault. The court granted bail as the petitioners joined investigation and custodial interrogation was deemed unnecessary, imposing standard conditions including availability for interrogation and non-interference with witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted as absolute till presentation of challan subject to conditions of availability for interrogation, non-inducement of witnesses, and no departure from India without permission.

Harmeet Singh & Anr. Vs State of Punjab — Bail and Remand | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

Crl. Misc. No. M-22315 of 2013

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Crl. Misc. No. M-22315 of 2013 Date of decision:-01.10.2013

¶5

Harmeet Singh and another

...Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI

¶11

Present:Mr. Amandeep Chhabra, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶12

RITU BAHRI J.(Oral)

¶13

This is a petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking anticipatory bail in a case registered against the petitioners, vide FIR No.33 dated 30.4.2013 under Sections 307, 324, 341, 323, 506, 148 and 149 IPC, registered at Police Station Lakho Ke Behram, District Ferozepur.

¶14

Learned State counsel on instructions from ASI Narender Singh has informed the Court that the petitioners have joined the investigation on 24.9.2013. At this stage, their custodial interrogation is not required.

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶16

In view of the above, order dated 15.07.2013 is hereby

¶17

Asija Vijay 2013.10.01 18:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh

¶18

Crl. Misc. No. M-22315 of 2013

¶19

-2-

¶20

made absolute till presentation of the challan, subject to the conditions as envisaged under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C, which reads as under:-

¶21

i. a condition that the persons shall make himself available for interrogation by Police Officer as and when required;

¶22

ii. a condition that the persons shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶23

iii.a condition that the persons shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court

¶24

iv.such other condition as may be imposed under sub section (3) of Section 437, as if the bail were granted under that section

¶25

Accordingly, the present petition stands disposed of.

¶26

However, the petitioner is at liberty to file fresh bail bonds

¶27

after presentation of the challan.

¶28

01.10.2013 ( RITU BAHRI ) Vijay Asija JUDGE

¶29

Asija Vijay 2013.10.01 18:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh

Harmeet Singh & Anr. v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harmeet Singh & 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Harchand Singh Vs Mohinder Singh and Ors.

Harchand Singh Vs Jarnail Singh and Ors.

Ajay Kumar Vaid and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Anr.

Jarnail Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Angur Lal and Others Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Rupinder Kaur & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.