The High Court made the interim order dated 26.02.2019, granting anticipatory bail and directing the petitioner to join the investigation, absolute, as the petitioner had complied and the State had not disputed compliance.
The interim order dated 26.02.2019 directing the petitioner to join the investigation was made absolute.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
S.No.201
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-8556 of 2019 (O&M) Date of Decision:28.11.2019 Baldev Singh .....Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab .....Respondent
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJBIR SEHRAWAT
Present:Mr. Jasdeep Singh Gill, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Harbir Sandhu, AAG, Punjab. ****
Rajbir Sehrawat, J.(Oral)
The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.174 dated 30.09.2018 registered under Section 304, 34 IPC at Police Station Beas, Amritsar Rural, District Amritsar, Punjab.
Counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to the interim direction granted vide order dated 26.02.2019, the petitioner has joined the investigation.
Learned counsel appearing for the State of Punjab has not disputed the fact regarding petitioner's joining the investigation.
In view of the above, the interim order dated 26.02.2019 is
made absolute.
Disposed of.
November 28, 2019 ( RAJBIR SEHRAWAT ) renu JUDGE Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No
RENU 2019.11.28 17:20 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the interim order for anticipatory bail and joining investigation should be made absolute.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Baldev Singh
State of Punjab
Rajbir Sehrawat
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
