Allowed

Subhash Chander v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC8 Feb 2017CRM-M/23944/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC to the petitioner accused of offences under IPC and Essential Commodities Act, subject to conditions including making himself available for interrogation and seeking regular bail post-challan.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail order dated 05.12.2016 made absolute till presentation of challan.

Subhash Chander Vs State of Haryana — Cheque Dishonour | Punjab & Haryana HC (2017)

¶1

CRM-M-23944 of 2016

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM-M-23944 of 2016 Date of Decision: 08.02.2017

¶5

Subhash Chander ....Petitioner

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

State of Haryana ....Respondent

¶8

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA

¶9

Present: Mr. Balraj Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶10

Mr. Tanuj Sharma, A.A.G., Haryana.

¶11

¶12

SURINDER GUPTA, J.(Oral)

¶13

The present petition has been filed under Section 438 Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 150 dated 18.06.2016 registered for offences punishable under Sections 409, 420 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, at Police Station Julana, District Jind.

¶14

Heard.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has deposited `40,000/- in Government Treasury and has also joined the investigation. Learned State counsel has also endorsed this fact.

¶16

The petitioner is a depot holder and allegation against him is that he had supplied less quantity of pulse to ration card holders. The case is based on documentary evidence.

¶17

In view of the fact that the petitioner has joined the investigation and his custodial interrogation is not required but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this petition is allowed and

¶18

Jitender Kumar 2017.02.08 15:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CHANDIGARH

¶19

CRM-M-23944 of 2016

¶20

-2-

¶21

order dated 05.12.2016 is made absolute till the presentation of challan, subject to the following terms:-

¶22

(i) that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by the police as and when required;

¶23

(ii) that the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the accusation against him so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶24

(iii) that the petitioner shall not leave India without the prior permission of the Court.

¶25

(iv) that the petitioner will seek regular bail on the presentation of challan in Court.

¶26

February 08, 2017 ( SURINDER GUPTA ) jk JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No

¶27

Jitender Kumar 2017.02.08 15:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CHANDIGARH

Subhash Chander v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subhash Chander 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

Lovepreet Singh Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Balwinder Singh Vs State of Haryana

Amninder Singh @ Amrinder Singh Vs State of Punjab

Surjit Kaur Vs Ashok Kumar

Neelu Jain Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Nimrajit Singh Randhawa and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.