Allowed

Meena Kumari and Another v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC26 Sept 2018CRM-M/26092/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order converted the interim anticipatory bail granted on 15.06.2018 to absolute bail for petitioners in an excise liquor case. Since the petitioners have joined investigation and are no longer required, the court allowed the petition.

What did the court decide?

Interim anticipatory bail granted vide order dated 15.06.2018 made absolute subject to conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

Meena Kumari and Another Vs State of Punjab — Anticipatory Bail | Punjab & Haryana HC (2018)

¶1

CRM-M No.26092 of 2018

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM-M No.26092 of 2018 Decided on: 26.09.2018

¶5

Meena Kumari and another

....Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab

....Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN

¶11

Present : Mr. K.D.S. Sodhi, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶12

Mr. M.S. Nagra, AAG, Punjab.

¶13

ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, J. (Oral)

¶14

The petitioners pray for grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No.131 dated 29.05.2018, registered under Sections 61/1/14 of the Excise Act, at Police Station Nakodar, Jalandhar.

¶15

The operative part of the order dated 15.06.2018, vide which interim anticipatory bail has been granted to the petitioners, is reproduced as under:-

¶16

“.... Counsel for the petitioners submits that FIR was registered on a secret information and thereafter by raiding the house of the petitioners who are husband and wife, 04 plastic bags containing 168 bottles of liquor were recovered.

¶17

Counsel for the petitioners further submits that petitioners are not involved in any other case and have been falsely implicated.

¶18

Notice of motion for 26.09.2018 ....”

¶19

Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that, in

¶20

MOHD YAKUB 2018.09.26 15:34 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh

¶21

CRM-M No.26092 of 2018 2

¶22

pursuance to the order dated 15.06.2018, the petitioners have appeared before the Investigating Officer and have joined the investigation.

¶23

Counsel for the State, on instructions from HC Bahadur Lal, has not disputed the aforesaid fact and submits that the petitioners are no more required for further investigation.

¶24

In view of the above, this petition is allowed and the interim bail granted to the petitioners vide order dated 15.06.2018 is made absolute subject to the conditions envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

¶25

(ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN) JUDGE 26.09.2018 yakub Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No

¶26

MOHD YAKUB 2018.09.26 15:34 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh

Meena Kumari and Another v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Meena Kumari and Another 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Balbir Singh Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Krishan Singh Vs State of Punjab

Kesri Vs Gurudatt and Ors.

Pushvinder Singh Vs State of Punjab

Amarjit Kaur Vs State of Punjab

Tejinder Singh @ Labhi Vs State of Punjab