Allowed

Vijay Pal v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC26 May 2014CRM-M/10218/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana accepted a petition for anticipatory bail in a case under Sections 323, 325, and 506 IPC. The court noted the petitioner had joined the investigation, with only Section 506 charges potentially non-bailable, and no prior criminal history. The interim bail was made absolute subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petition for anticipatory bail accepted; interim bail made absolute subject to Section 438(2) conditions.

Vijay Pal Vs State of Haryana — Cheating and Forgery | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

CRM No.M-10218 of 2014

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM No.M-10218 of 2014 Date of Decision:- 26. 05.2014

Vijay Pal

.....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana

.....Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR

¶11

Present: Mr. Gorav Kathuria, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr. Kartar Singh, D.A.G., Haryana for the respondent-State.

¶13

¶14

MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR , J.(oral)

¶15

Petitioner-Vijay Pal son of Nafe 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, Pardeep, Vijender and Pawan, vide FIR No.72 dated 10.02.2014, on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 323 and 506 read with Section 34 IPC (the offence punishable under Section 325 IPC was added later on), by the police of Police Station Sadar Bhadurgarh, District Jhajjar.

¶16

Notice of the petition was issued to the State.

¶17

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, going

¶18

Kumar Naresh 2014.05.29 14:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶19

CRM No.M-10218 of 2014 -2-

¶20

through the record with their valuable assistance and after considering the entire matter deeply, to my mind, the present petition for anticipatory bail deserves to be accepted in this context.

¶21

Indisputedly, the complainant has initially lodged the present case against the petitioner, Pardeep, Vijender and Pawan. Subsequently, he has withdrawn the case against all other co-accused, except the petitioner. Moreover, the interim bail was granted to enable the petitioner to join the investigation, by means of order dated March 22, 2014, by a Co.-ordinate Bench of this Court (M. Jeyapaul, J.).

¶22

At this stage, on instructions from SI Azad Singh, learned State Counsel has acknowledged the relevant factual matrix and submitted that the petitioner has already joined the investigation. He is no longer required for further interrogation. Moreover, all the offences alleged against the petitioner are bailable, except the offence punishable under Section 506 IPC (which according to the petitioner is not made out). 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 prosecution has not yet submitted the final police report (challan) against the accused, so, the final conclusion of trial will naturally take a long time.

¶23

In the light of aforesaid reasons and taking into consideration the totality of 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 virtue of order dated March 22, 2014, by this Court, is hereby made absolute,

¶24

Kumar Naresh 2014.05.29 14:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶25

CRM No.M-10218 of 2014 -3-

¶26

subject to the compliance of the conditions, as contemplated under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

¶27

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

¶28

May 26, 2014 ( M EHINDER S INGH S ULLAR) naresh.k JUDGE

¶29

Kumar Naresh 2014.05.29 14:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

Vijay Pal v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Pal v. State of Haryana

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

Mangal Singh and Anr. Vs Dharam Bir and Ors.

Satpal Bansal and Anr. Vs State of Punjab

Gurpreet Singh Vs State of Punjab

Jyotshna Sharma and Anr. Vs State of Punjab

Surender Vs State of Haryana

Gurmeet Singh @ Gita Vs State of Punjab