Allowed

Amandeep Singh v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC22 Sept 2015CRM-M/9424/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted pre-arrest/anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The Court held that custodial interrogation was not required and allowed the pending petition subject to conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C., leaving the claim for recovery of materials open.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted anticipatory bail; interim order dated 25.3.2015 made absolute subject to Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. conditions; recovery of bricks not precluded.

Amandeep Singh Vs State of Punjab — Anticipatory Bail | Punjab & Haryana HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Criminal Misc. No. M- 9424 of 2015 Date of Decision: 22.9.2015

Amandeep Singh

--Petitioner.

Vs.

State of Punjab

--Respondents.

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK

¶9

Present : Mr. J.S. Mehndiratta, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶10

Mr. K.D.Sachdeva, Additional A.G. Punjab.

¶11

Mr. Ritesh Pandey, Advocate for the complainant.

¶12

¶13

RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK J. (ORAL)

¶14

Petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in FIR No. 146 dated 6.9.2014 registered under Sections 380/427/448/456 IPC, at Police Station City Batala, Police District Batala.

¶15

Notice of motion was issued and interim protection was granted. Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Balwinder Singh, submits that although the petitioner has joined the investigation but some bricks and other building material are yet to be recovered.

¶16

Learned counsel for the complainant opposes the present petition contending that learned civil court of competent jurisdiction dismissed the application of the petitioner, vide order dated 27.7.2015 in their civil suit No. 202 of 2014. Thus, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned counsel for the State pray for dismissal of the present petition.

¶17

AMIT KUMAR 2015.09.23 15:44 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶18

¶19

Criminal Misc. No. M- 9424 of 2015

¶20

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after careful perusal of the record of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required, thus, petitioner is entitled for the concession of anticipatory bail.

¶21

In view of the above and leaving the claim of the complainant for recovering bricks and other building material open, instant petition is allowed and order dated 25.3.2015 passed by this Court is hereby made absolute, however, subject to the conditions envisaged under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C.

¶22

Disposed of, accordingly.

¶23

(RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK) JUDGE

¶24

22.9.2015 AK Sharma

¶25

AMIT KUMAR 2015.09.23 15:44 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

Amandeep Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amandeep 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manjit Singh Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Manjeet Kaur Vs Jatinder Singh Alias Mintu etc.

Sukhdev Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Bakhtawar Singh Alias Bhola Vs State of Punjab

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Chameli Devi and Ors.

Nirmala Devi and Ors. Vs Anil Nayyar and Ors.