Allowed

Ram Kumar v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC25 May 2018CRM-M/10360/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court entertained a petition for anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC. Relying on the State's submission that custodial interrogation was no longer needed, the court allowed the application subject to specific conditions including availability for interrogation and obtaining regular bail upon presentation of the challan.

What did the court decide?

Grant of anticipatory bail till the presentation of the challan subject to four specific conditions.

Ram Kumar Vs State of Punjab — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Punjab & Haryana HC (2018)

¶1

CRM-M-10360-2018

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶4

Crl. Misc. No.M-10360 of 2018 (O&M) Date of Decision: May 25, 2018

¶5

Ram Kumar

¶6

......PETITIONER(s).

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

State of Punjab

¶9

....RESPONDENT(s).

¶10

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA

¶11

Present: Mr. Bhupinder Ghai, Advocate for the petitioner (s).

¶12

Mr. Amandeep S. Gill, Senior D.A.G. Punjab.

¶13

¶14

SURINDER GUPTA, J.(Oral)

¶15

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.0129 dated 04.12.2017 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 324, 506/34, 148 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code, at Police Station Kathgarh, District SBS Nagar.

¶16

Heard.

¶17

Learned State counsel submits that petitioner has joined the investigation. As per the allegations in the complaint, he has not been attributed any injury. The investigation is still in progress but custodial interrogation of the petitioner is no more required for the purpose of further investigation.

¶18

In view of submission of learned State counsel but without

¶19

Sachin Mehta 2018.05.25 16:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh

¶20

CRM-M-10360-2018

¶21

-2-

¶22

expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this petition is allowed and order dated 20.04.2018 is made absolute till the presentation of challan, subject to the following terms:-

¶23

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

¶24

(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;

¶25

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

¶26

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

¶27

May 25, 2018

¶28

( SURINDER GUPTA ) JUDGE

¶29

Sachin M.

¶30

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No

¶31

Sachin Mehta 2018.05.25 16:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh

Ram Kumar v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Kumar 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

Uhbvnl Vs Megh Nath

Parveen Kumari Vs Simpal Sanotra and Others

Mukesh Kumar Vs Pardeep & Ors.

Parveen Vs State of Haryana

Satnam Singh @ Sonu Vs State of Punjab

Sajjan Singh Vs State of Punjab