The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed a petition for anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC. The court held that the petitioner, a habitual offender, hatched a criminal conspiracy to cheat the complainant out of Rs.25 lacs. Gravitating bail would hinder recovery and effective investigation.
The petition for anticipatory bail was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
CRM No.M-8541 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM No.M-8541 of 2013(O&M) Date of Decision:08.04.2013
Mahinder Pal .....Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab .....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR.
Present: Ms.Maninder Kaur, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr.K.S.Aulakh, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, for the respondent-State.
MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR , J.(oral)
Petitioner-Mahinder Pal son of Ram Saran Dass, has preferred the instant petition for the grant of anticipatory bail in a case registered against him along with his other co-accused, by virtue of FIR No.141 dated 24.12.2012, for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 IPC, by the police of Police Station Anandpur Sahib, District Rupnagar, invoking the provisions of Section 438 Cr.P.C.
CRM No.M-8541 of 2013 2
CRM No.M-8541 of 2013 3
is essential, to recover the indicated amount, other case property and documents in this relevant connection. If the petitioner is allowed the benefit of anticipatory bail, then the police will be deprived from recovering Rs.25 lacs, other case property, documents and effective investigation, which would naturally adversely affect and weaken the case of the prosecution.
CRM No.M-8541 of 2013 4
Needless to mention that nothing observed, here-in-above, would reflect on the merits of the main case, in any manner, as the same has been so recorded for a limited purpose of deciding the present petition for anticipatory bail.
April 08, 2013 ( M EHINDER S INGH S ULLAR) seema JUDGE
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in a case involving allegations of cheating and misappropriation.
Whether the petitioner being a habitual offender and involved in other similar cases makes a strong case for denying anticipatory bail.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Mahinder Pal
State of Punjab
Mehender Singh Sullar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
