Allowed

Manpreet Singh Walia v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC20 Sept 2018CRM-M/23188/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court converted an interim order of anticipatory bail into an absolute bail order. The investigation was concluded, the petitioner was on trial, and no further presence was required, satisfying the statutory conditions for permanent bail.

What did the court decide?

Interim anticipatory bail granted vide order dated 04.06.2018 made absolute subject to Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. conditions.

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

¶1

CRM-M No.23188 of 2018

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM-M No.23188 of 2018 Decided on: 20.09.2018

Manpreet Singh Walia

....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

....Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN Present : Mr. H.S. Randhawa, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶11

Mr. Sidakmeet Singh Sandhu, AAG, Punjab.

¶12

ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, J. (Oral)

¶13

The petitioner prays for grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No.158 dated 31.07.2017, registered under Sections 324, 341, 307, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC') at Police Station Civil Lines, Patiala, District Patiala.

¶14

The operative part of the order dated 04.06.2018, vide which interim anticipatory bail has been granted to the petitioner, is reproduced as under:-

¶15

“.... It is contended that similarly situated coaccused has been afforded ad interim relief by this Court on 21.05.2018 in CRM-M-21590 of 2018 (Annexure P-8). The only difference is that the petitioner had earlier filed an application for anticipatory bail, which was dismissed as withdrawn on 11.09.2017. However, thereafter, the petitioner has been admitted to bail by the learned trial Court and he was facing proceedings under Sections 324, 341, 506, 34 IPC. The apprehension of the petitioner is that he may be proceeded against under Section 307 IPC as challan has now been filed against co-accused Tarunvir Sharma under Section 307 IPC, as well.

¶16

MOHD YAKUB 2018.09.20 16:58 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh

¶17

CRM-M No.23188 of 2018 2

¶18

Notice of motion for 20.09.2018 ....”

¶19

Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that, in pursuance to the order dated 04.06.2018, the petitioner has appeared before the Investigating Officer and has joined the investigation. It is further submitted that the Additional Sessions Judge, has also framed charges and the petitioner is facing the trial. It is also submitted that the petitioner has also been granted interim bail by the Additional Sessions Judge vide order dated 10.09.2018.

¶20

Counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Mewa Singh, has not disputed the aforesaid fact and submits that the petitioner is no more required for further investigation.

¶21

In view of the above, this petition is allowed and the interim bail granted to the petitioner vide order dated 04.06.2018 is made absolute subject to the conditions envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

¶22

		(ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN) JUDGE
20.09.2018
yakub
	Whether speaking/rea	soned Yes/No
	Whether reportable:	Yes/No

¶23

MOHD YAKUB 2018.09.20 16:58 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh

Manpreet Singh Walia v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manpreet Singh Walia 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

Dharamvir Welder Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Kulwinder Kaur and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Sarabjit Singh Bedi Vs Daulat Ram

Bikramjit Singh Cheema Vs State of Punjab

Surinder Singh & Anr. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Surjit Singh Vs State of Punjab