The High Court refused pre-arrest bail, holding that the petitioner failed to avail the statutory remedy by approaching the Sessions Court under Section 438 Cr.P.C., though an arrest stay was granted till 29.4.2014 to facilitate the remedy.
Petitioner relegated to seeking pre-arrest bail from Sessions Court; not arrested till 29.4.2014.
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.
Raj Kumar Arora 2014.04.23 15:10
CRM-M-13327-2014 (O&M)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-13327-2014 (O&M). Decided on: April 22, 2014.
Balwinder Ram
..... Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Punjab
..... Respondent(s)
*** * * CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI PRESENT Mr.Gaurav Bhaiyya, Advocate, for the petitioner.**
M.M.S. BEDI, J (ORAL).
The petitioner seeks concession of pre-arrest bail in a case registered at the instance of Dharminder Singh alleging that the petitioner had entered into an agreement of sale as general power of attorney holder of Jangir Singh with the complainant to sell the property of Jangir Singh on receipt of earnest money of Rs.5 lacs on 19.10.2007.
Counsel for the petitioner submits that the complainant has not filed any case for specific performance or for recovery of the money though a period of 7 years has elapsed and with an oblique motive to harass the petitioner and to extort money in the garb of FIR the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. The petitioner claims that he has never met the complainant and has also not entered into any transaction with him. It is claimed that in case the complainant is able to establish payment of any money to
1
CRM-M-13327-2014 (O&M)
the petitioner, the petitioner is ready to pay that money to the complainant.
I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and I am of the opinion that the petitioner has not availed the remedy of approaching the Sessions Court by moving an application under Section 438 Cr.P.C..
Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has got a reasonable apprehension of arrest in case he opts to file a petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C., in the area of Nawanshahar as the complainant with his influence is bent upon to get the petitioner arrested to extort money.
Taking into consideration the totalilty of all the circumstances, in the interest of justice, the petitioner is relegated to the remedy to approach the Sessions Court. The petitioner will not be arrested till 29.4.2014 in the case registered at the instance of Dharminder Singh. The petitioner may avail the above said remedy by said date.
Disposed of accordingly.
A copy of the order be given dasti under signatures
of Reader of the Court.
(M.M.S. BEDI)
April 22, 2014. JUDGE rka
2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether pre-arrest bail can be granted when the petitioner has not availed the remedy of approaching the Sessions Court.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Balwinder Ram
State of Punjab
M.M.S. BEDI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
