Partly allowed

Jagdeep Sangwan v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC27 Nov 2015CRM-M/24589/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC in an FIR involving IPC offences. The Court converted interim bail, previously granted during investigation, into absolute bail by analogy with bail secured in a related case on similar allegations, disposing the matter without merits. Relief: Interim bail made absolute.

What did the court decide?

Order dated 24.9.2015 granting interim bail is confirmed and made absolute.

Jagdeep Sangwan Vs State of Haryana — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2015)

¶1

Crl. Misc. No. M-24589 of 2015

¶2

-1-

¶3

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh

¶4

Crl. Misc. No. M-24589 of 2015 Date of Decision: 27.11.2015.

Jagdeep Sangwan

.......Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana

......Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA

¶11

Present: Mr. Sameer Rathaur, Advocate for Mr. Sumeet Goel, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

Ms. Dimple Jain, AAG, Haryana.

¶13

¶14

SABINA, J.

¶15

Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No. 367 dated 25.12.2014 under Section 279, 336, 420, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('IPC' for short) and Section 61 of Punjab Excise Act, 1914 ('Act' for short), registered at Police Station Badhra, District Bhiwani, Haryana.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner has been involved in two cases by levelling similar allegations. In FIR No. 29 dated 27.1.2015 under Section 279, 336, 420, 120-B IPC and Section 61 of the Act, registered at Police Station Badhra, District Bhiwani, petitioner has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court.

¶17

Learned State counsel has submitted that petitioner has joined investigation but is not co-operating with the investigating

¶18

GURPREET SINGH 2015.11.30 12:20 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh

¶19

Crl. Misc. No. M-24589 of 2015

¶20

-2-

¶21

agency.

¶22

On 24.9.2015, following order was passed by this

¶23

Court:-

¶24

“Learned counsel for the petitioner requests for an adjournment.

¶25

List again on 27.11.2015.

¶26

In the meantime, in the event of arrest, petitioner be admitted to interim bail subject to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. Petitioner shall abide by the conditions envisaged under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

¶27

Petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer on 1.10.2015 at 10.00 A.M.”

¶28

Since in the present case, in another FIR registered against the petitioner qua similar allegations, petitioner has been granted anticipatory bail, it would be just and expedient to confirm the interim bail granted by this Court to the petitioner vide order dated 24.9.2015.

¶29

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this petition is disposed of with a direction that interim bail granted by this Court to the petitioner vide order dated 24.9.2015 is made absolute.

¶30

(SABINA) JUDGE

¶31

November 27, 2015 Gurpreet

¶32

GURPREET SINGH 2015.11.30 12:20 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh

Jagdeep Sangwan v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jagdeep Sangwan 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

Vinod Kumar Choudhary Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Raj Rani Vs State of Haryana & Anr.

Mehboob Hasan Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Jastim Kaur Vs Parvinder Singh

Manvir Singh Vs Ut of Chandigarh & Anr.

Balbir Singh Vs State of Punjab & Ors.