Allowed

Gurpal Singh v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC4 Dec 2014CRM-M/36907/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed anticipatory bail petition under Cr.P.C. Section 438 for petitioner accused of cheating. Found case appears to be of civil nature involving property sale and unreturned funds; petitioner joined investigation and not needed for custodial interrogation.

What did the court decide?

Petition for anticipatory bail allowed. Order dated 30102014 granting interim bail made absolute.

Gurpal Singh Vs State of Punjab — Cheating and Forgery | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

203

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

CRM No.M-36907 of 2014 Date of Decision: December 04, 2014

Gurpal Singh

...Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

¶10

Present: Mr.Inder Pal Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶11

Mr.S.S.Chandumajra, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.

¶12

Mr.Lalit Pathak, Advocate for the complainant.

¶13

¶14

INDERJIT SINGH, J.

¶15

Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.133 dated 31.08.2014 under Sections 406 and 420 IPC registered at Police Station Mattaur, Mohali.

¶16

Notice of motion was issued and learned State counsel and learned counsel for the complainant appeared and contested the petition.

¶17

I have heard learned counsel for the parties as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record.

¶18

From the record, I find that FIR in the present case has

¶19

VINEET GULATI 2014.12.08 15:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶20

CRM No.M-36907 of 2014

¶21

-2-

¶22

been registered on the basis of statement of Bhupinder Kaur. The main allegation of the complainant against the accused-petitioner is that petitioner has kept complainant's and her sister-in-law Balwinder Kaur's share of amount after selling the property and he asked them that he will deposit the money in the Bank and told them that whenever they require the money, he will give them the money after calculation and now they have come to know that money has not been deposited in their account.

¶23

The petitioner has already joined the investigation. He is not required for custodial interrogation nor anything is to be recovered from him. The dispute looks like of civil nature.

¶24

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and without discussing the merits of the case in minute details and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it a fit case where petitioner is entitled to benefit of anticipatory bail. Therefore, the present petition is allowed. The order dated 30.10.2014 granting interim bail to the petitioner is made absolute.

¶25

December 04, 2014 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE

¶26

VINEET GULATI 2014.12.08 15:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Gurpal Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gurpal Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Parveen Mattu & Anr. Vs State of Punjab & Anr.

Surjit Singh Vs State of Punjab

Kashmir Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Balwan Singh Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Subeg Singh Vs State of Punjab

Sandhuri Lal Mittal Vs State of Punjab & Anr.