Allowed

R.K. Singla v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC22 Jul 2014CRM-M/18580/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana disposed of three identical petitions by the same petitioner R.K. Singla. Relying on earlier orders granting conditional bail and anticipatory bail to a co-accused, the court made the interim provisional bail absolute and extended anticipatory bail.

What did the court decide?

The petitions for anticipatory bail are accepted and the interim provisional bails are made absolute.

R.K. Singla Vs State of Punjab and Anr. — Anticipatory Bail | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

CRM No.M-18580 of 2014, -1CRM No.M-19175 of 2014 & CRM No.M-19196 of 2014

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
(1) CRM No.M-18580 of 2014
R.K. Singla ..Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and another ..Respondents
(2) CRM No.M-19175 of 2014
R.K. Singla ..Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and another ..Respondents
(3) CRM No.M-19196 of 2014
R.K. Singla ..Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and another ..Respondents Date of Decision: - 22.07.2014
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR
Present: Mr. Viney Puri, Advocate, for the petitioners.
Ms. Amarjit Khurana, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, for the respondent-State.
Mr. Gaurav Hooda, Advocate, for complainant-respondent No.2.

¶3

Kumar Naresh 2014.07.30 15:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶4

CRM No.M-18580 of 2014, CRM No.M-19175 of 2014 & CRM No.M-19196 of 2014

¶5

-2-

¶6

MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR , J.(oral)

¶7

As, identical points for consideration to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner or othewise are involved, therefore, I propose to decide the above indicated petitions bearing CRM No.M-18580 of 2014, titled as “R.K. Singla Versus State of Punjab and another” (for brevity “the 1^st Case”), CRM No.M-19175 of 2014, titled as “R.K. Singla Versus State of Punjab and another” (for short “the 2nd case”) and CRM No.M19196 of 2014, titled as “R.K. Singla Versus State of Punjab and another” (in short “the 3rd case”), arising out of the similar complaints/cases between the parties, by means of this common order, to avoid the repetition of facts.

¶8

Petitioner, has directed the instant separate petitions for the grant of pre-arrest bail, in a criminal private complaints (Annexure P-1) instituted against him, by Registrar of Companies (respondent No.2), in which, he was summoned to face the trial for commission of offences punishable under Section 62 read with Section 628 of The Companies Act, 1956, by the trial Court.

¶9

Notices of the petitions were issued to the State.

¶10

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 petitions for anticipatory bail deserve to be accepted in this context.

¶11

During the course of preliminary hearing, the following order was passed by this Court on May, 28, 2014 in the 1st case:-

¶12

Kumar Naresh 2014.07.30 15:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶13

CRM No.M-18580 of 2014, CRM No.M-19175 of 2014 & CRM No.M-19196 of 2014

¶14

-3-

¶15

“Learned counsel, inter alia, contended that Registrar of companies has filed a complaint (Annexure P-1) against the accused by mentioning his wrong address. He was neither served nor the pendency of the complaint was in his knowledge. He was declared proclaimed offender by the trial Court, without following the due procedure and without any cogent legal ground. Petitioner undertakes to regularly appear in the trial Court. Moreover, the controversy involved in the instant petition is stated to be identical to the one raised in CRM-M No.17397 of 2014 titled as “Varesh Chalana and another Vs. State of Punjab and another, in which, notice of motion has already been issued, by order dated 20.05.2014 (Annexure P-4), by this Court.

¶16

Heard.

¶17

Notice of motion be issued to the respondents, returnable for 22.07.2014.

¶18

Meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to appear/surrender before the next date of hearing and the trial Court would admit him to interim (provisional) bail, on his filing specific affidavit that he will regularly attend the proceedings in the trial Court in future and on furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds to its satisfaction.”

¶19

Sequelly, the similar orders were passed by this Court, in 2nd and 3rd cases, as well.

¶20

At the very outset, learned counsel has placed on record the certified copies of orders dated 11.06.2014, which would reveal that petitioner has already appeared/surrendered and bail & surety bonds furnished by him, in pursuance of the pointed orders of this Court, were attested and accepted by the trial Court. Moreover, it is not a matter of dispute that, Varesh Chalana, another co-accused of the petitioner, has already been granted the concession of anticipatory bail, by virtue of order dated 29.05.2014, rendered in CRM-M No.17397 of 2014, by this

¶21

Kumar Naresh 2014.07.30 15:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶22

CRM No.M-18580 of 2014, -4CRM No.M-19175 of 2014 & CRM No.M-19196 of 2014

¶23

Court. Therefore, in that eventuality, I see no reason not to extend the same benefit of anticipatory bail to the present petitioner, under the similar set of circumstances as well.

¶24

In the light of aforesaid reasons, taking into consideration the totality of facts and circumstances, emanating from the record, as discussed here-in-above, the instant petitions for anticipatory bail are accepted. The interim (provisional) bails already granted to the petitioners, by way of indicated orders of this Court, are hereby made absolute.

¶25

July 22, 2014 ( M EHINDER S INGH S ULLAR) naresh.k JUDGE

¶26

Kumar Naresh 2014.07.30 15:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

R.K. Singla v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.K. Singla v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Randhir Singh @Dheera Vs State of Punjab

Hardeep Singh Vs State of Punjab

Surjit Singh Vs Balbir Kaur etc.

Sunny Vs State of Punjab

Rashpal Singh @ Baba Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Krishan @ Lala Vs State of Haryana