Allowed

Harmeet Singh v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC29 May 2018CRM-M/14278/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed a petition under Section 438 CrPC for anticipatory bail regarding offences under the Indian Penal Code and Arms Act. The order is made subject to conditions including availability for interrogation and seeking regular bail upon challan presentation. It is decision date: May 29, 2018.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted under Section 438 CrPC subject to standard conditions and to seek regular bail upon challan presentation.

Harmeet Singh Vs State of Haryana — Anticipatory Bail | Punjab & Haryana HC (2018)

¶1

CRM-M-14278-2018

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶4

Crl. Misc. No.M-14278 of 2018 (O&M) Date of Decision: May 29, 2018

¶5

Harmeet Singh

¶6

......PETITIONER(s).

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

State of Haryana

¶9

....RESPONDENT(s).

¶10

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA

¶11

Present: Mr. Ish Puneet Singh, Advocate for the petitioner (s).

¶12

Mr. Ashish Yadav, Addl.A.G. Haryana.

¶13

Mr. Vineet Chaudhary, Advocate for the complainant.

¶14

¶15

SURINDER GUPTA, J.(Oral)

¶16

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.225 dated 12.08.2017 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 323, 365, 307, 120-B, 506 Indian Penal Code and 25 of Arms Act, 1959, at Police Station Rania, District Sirsa.

¶17

Heard.

¶18

Learned State counsel submits that petitioner has joined the investigation, which is still in progress but his custodial interrogation is no more required for the purpose of further investigation.

¶19

In view of submission of learned State counsel but without Sachin Mehta 2018.05.29 17:08 expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this petition is allowed and I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document HIGH COURT, CHANDIGARH

¶20

CRM-M-14278-2018

¶21

-2-

¶22

order dated 06.04.2018 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

( SURINDER GUPTA ) May 29, 2018 JUDGE Sachin M.

¶28

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No

¶29

Whether Reportable: Yes/No

¶30

Sachin Mehta 2018.05.29 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document HIGH COURT, CHANDIGARH

Harmeet Singh v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harmeet Singh 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

Santosh Kumar Vs Harpreet Singh Dhammi

Ram Murti Vs Mohan Lal

Phuman Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Bachan Singh Vs State of Punjab

Raghubir Singh and Anr. Vs Sunil Kumar and Anr.

Mewa Singh Vs Santosh Kaur and Ors.