Single judge accepted a petition for anticipatory bail, converting interim bail granted earlier into absolute bail. The petitioners were accused of offences under IPC and SC/ST Act for submitting false private complaints.
Anticipatory bail granted and interim provisional bail made absolute.
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.
CRM No.M-10624 of 2014
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM No.M-10624 of 2014 Date of Decision:- 28.04.2014
Mukhtiar Singh and others
.....Petitioners
Versus
Bahadur Singh and another
.....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR
Present: Mr. T.S. Sangha, Senior Advocate with Mr. Narinder Singh, Advocate, for the petitioners.
Mr. Sant Pal Singh Sidhu, Advocate for respondent No.1.
Ms. Amarjit Khurana, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, for the State.
MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR , J.(oral)
Petitioners-Mukhtiar Singh son of Dhara Singh and others, have preferred the instant petition for the grant of anticipatory bail in a criminal case instituted on a private complaint, by complainant-Bahadur Singh son of Chanan Singh (respondent No.1), in which, they were summoned to face the trial for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 325, 324, 323, 295-A and 148 read with Section 149 IPC and Section 3 of The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, by the trial Court.
Kumar Naresh 2014.04.29 17:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
CRM No.M-10624 of 2014
2
order was passed by this Court on April 07, 2014: - -
“Learned counsel, inter alia, contended that initially a criminal case was registered against Resham Singh (brother of complainant Bahadur Singh), at the instance of Sukhchain Singh, vide FIR No. 52 dated 11.03.2013, on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323 and 506 read with Section 149 IPC, by the police of Police Station Kotwali, District Faridkot. Subsequently, the police recorded the statement of Resham Singh and a cross case (counter version) was also registered against the petitioners. During the course of investigation, the story contained in the counter version was found to be false by the police, with respect to the offences punishable under Section 295-A and Section 3 of The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC&ST Act). Now, again the complainant has filed a false private criminal complaint, in which, the petitioners were summoned to face the trial, for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 325, 324, 323, 295-A and 148 read with Section 149 IPC and Section 3 of the SC&ST Act. The argument is that no offence under Section 3 of the SC&ST Act, is made out against the petitioners, in view of the ratio of law laid down by this Court in case Dr. Onkar Chander Jagpal vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh and another, 2012(1) RCR (Criminal) 931.
Heard.
Issue notice of motion to the respondents.
At this stage, Ms. Amarjit Khurana, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, on behalf of the State-respondent No.2 & Mr. Sant Pal Singh Sandhu, Advocate, on behalf of complainant-respondent No.1, appear, accept notices and seek time to argue the matter.
Adjourned to 28.04.2014 for arguments, at the request of counsel for the respondents.
Meanwhile, the petitioners are directed to appear/surrender before the next date of hearing and the concerned Court would admit them to interim
Kumar Naresh 2014.04.29 17:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
CRM No.M-10624 of 2014
3
(provisional) bail, on their furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds to its satisfaction.”
April 28, 2014 ( M EHINDER S INGH S ULLAR) naresh.k JUDGE
Kumar Naresh 2014.04.29 17:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petition for anticipatory bail deserves to be accepted considering the Court's earlier interim order and allegations of false complaints.
Whether under-representation and false cases justify granting anticipatory bail in public interest/fugitive nature of the offence.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dr. Onkar Chander Jagpal vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh and anotherRelied on¶24
Dr. Onkar Chander Jagpal vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh and another, 2012(1) RCR (Criminal) 931
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Mukhtiar Singh and others
Bahadur Singh
Mehender Singh Sullar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
