The High Court of Punjab and Haryana allowed a petition for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C., making an interim order absolute. The court found merit, noting the petitioner was already released on bail and no custodial interrogation was necessary.
The petition is allowed; the interim order granting bail is made absolute.
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.
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
Criminal Misc. No.M-40134 of 2015
.....
Date of decision:27.10.2016
Joginder Singh
.....Petitioner
v.
State of Haryana and another
.....Respondents
Present: Mr. R.S. Mamli, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Vikramjit Singh, Additional Advocate General, Haryana for the respondent-State.
None for the private respondent.
Inderjit Singh, J.
This petition has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in criminal complaint No.44904 of 2013 filed on 2.11.2011 titled as “Mohinder Singh Vs. Joginder Singh and others” for the offences under Sections 420, 427, 218, 465, 467, 471, 500 and 120-B IPC and summoned under Sections 420, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Kurukshetra.
Notice of motion has been issued in this case.
Mr. Vikramjit Singh, learned Additional Advocate General, Haryana has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent-State and contested this petition.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Advocate General, Haryana appearing for the respondent-State
Harpal Singh Parmar 2016.10.27 16:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
Cr. Misc. No.M-40134 of 2015
[2]
and have gone through the record.
From the record, I find that in the complaint case the petitioner has been summoned. In view of the interim order, he has already appeared before the trial Court and has been released on bail. The petitioner is not required for any investigation or custodial interrogation purposes. No useful purpose will be served by sending the petitioner to custody. He is only to face the trial.
Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case; I find merit in this petition and the same is allowed. The interim order dated 30.1.2015 passed by this Court granting interim bail to the petitioner is made absolute.
October 27, 2016. (Inderjit Singh) Judge hsp NOTE: Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: No
Harpal Singh Parmar 2016.10.27 16:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a petition for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. deserves to be allowed given that the petitioner is already on bail and not required for investigation.
Whether the interim order of bail should be made absolute.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Joginder Singh
State of Haryana
Inderjit Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
