Allowed

Jaswinder Kaur v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC13 May 2014CRM-M/12566/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge affirmed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a criminal case involving IPC offences. The court made the interim bail absolute subject to compliance with statutory conditions and the requirement to join the investigation.

What did the court decide?

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

Jaswinder Kaur Vs State of Haryana — Anticipatory Bail | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

CRM No.M-12566 of 2014

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM No.M-12566 of 2014 Date of Decision:- 13.05.2014

Jaswinder Kaur

.....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana

.....Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR

¶11

Present: Mr. Lal Singh Sandhu, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr. H.S. Deol, Additional Advocate General, Haryana for the respondent-State.

¶13

¶14

MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR , J.(oral)

¶15

Petitioner-Jaswinder Kaur wife of Balraj Singh, has preferred the instant petition for the grant of anticipatory bail, in a case registered against her along with her other co-accused, vide FIR No.85 dated 21.03.2014, on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 147, 149, 323, 452, 447, 341 and 506 IPC, by the police of Police Station City Dabwali.

¶16

Notice of the petition was issued to the State.

¶17

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, going 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.

¶18

Kumar Naresh 2014.05.20 15:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶19

CRM No.M-12566 of 2014

¶20

-2-

¶21

During the course of preliminary hearing, the following order was passed by this Court on April 11, 2014: -

¶22

“Learned counsel, inter alia, contended that petitioner, who is a lady and the complainant, are family members. The husband of the petitioner is in possession of the house in question. The incident originated at a spur of the moment. The argument is that, even otherwise, all the offences alleged against the accused are bailable. The offence punishable under Section 452 IPC, (which is not made out) was added, in order to make it a non-bailable case and to enhance the gravity of the offence.

¶23

Heard.

¶24

Notice of motion be issued to the respondent, returnable for 30.04.2014. Meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to join the investigation before the next date of hearing. In the event of her arrest, the Arresting Officer would admit her to bail on her furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds in the sum of ` 25,000/- to his satisfaction.”

¶25

At the very outset, on instructions from SI Suraj Bhan, Singh, learned State Counsel has acknowledged the relevant factual matrix and submitted that the petitioner has already joined the investigation. She is no longer required for further interrogation, at this stage. There is no history of her 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.

¶26

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 this Court, by virtue of order dated 11.04.2014, is hereby made absolute, subject to

¶27

Kumar Naresh 2014.05.20 15:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶28

CRM No.M-12566 of 2014

¶29

-3-

¶30

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

¶31

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 her bail, in this Court.

¶32

May 13, 2014 ( M EHINDER S INGH S ULLAR) naresh.k JUDGE

¶33

Kumar Naresh 2014.05.20 15:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

Jaswinder Kaur v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaswinder Kaur 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

Nusrat Khan Vs State of Punjab

Kanwalpreet Singh Vs State of Punjab

Sobha Singh Vs State of Punjab

Ravi @ Toni & Anr. Vs State of Haryana

Ravinder @ Ravi Vs State of Haryana

Lakhwinder Singh Vs State of Punjab