Allowed

Poonam @ Poona v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC8 May 2020CRM-M/11122/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed a bail petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioner accused of abducting a minor. There was no objection from the victim in her 164 statement, as she was recovered from another accused. The court held that keeping the petitioner in custody served no useful purpose given the delay in trial.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; petitioner admitted to bail to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate.

Poonam @ Poona Vs State of Punjab — Anticipatory Bail | Punjab & Haryana HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

CRM-M-11122-2020 Decided on : 08.05.2020

Poonam @ Poona

. . . Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Punjab

. . . Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

¶9

PRESENT: Mr. Ramesh Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

¶10

Ms. Bhavna Gupta, DAG, Punjab assisted by ASI Sukhjinder Singh.

¶11

¶12

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J.

¶13

The instant petition has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail in case FIR No. 229, dated 31.10.2019, under Sections 363, 366-A, 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station City 1 Abohar, District Fazilka.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the FIR in question was registered at the instance of Tirath Kumar (father of the victim), wherein, it was alleged by him that on 19.10.2019 at about 07:00 P.M., his daughter went missing from his house and he suspected that she had been enticed away by one Vijay Kumar, Sukhi and Poona (present petitioner) on the pretext of getting her marriage solemnized.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia submits that a perusal of the FIR, which was lodged after an inordinate delay of 12 days clearly reveals that totally vague and false allegations have been levelled by the complainant against the petitioner. It has also been submitted that the similarly situated co-accused i.e. Vijay Kumar and Sukhi have already been JAWALA RAM 2020.05.08 15:31 granted concession of bail and no useful purpose would thus be served by I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶16

CRM-M-11122-2020

¶17

- 2 -

¶18

keeping the petitioner behind bars, as the trial is unlikely to conclude in the near future.

¶19

It has been further submitted that the victim in her statement recorded under Sections 164 Cr.P.C. before the Court below did not level any allegations against the petitioner. Not only this, the victim was allegedly recovered from the custody of the co-accused Harpreet Kaur and not from the petitioner.

¶20

Learned State counsel on the other hand has vehemently opposed the grant of concession of regular bail to the petitioner, however, she has not been able to controvert the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner qua the factum of the victim having been recovered from the custody of the co-accused Harpreet Kaur and the victim having not made any allegations against the petitioner in her statement under Sections 164 Cr.P.C.

¶21

Heard.

¶22

After considering the submissions made by either side, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the petitioner behind bars, who has been behind bars since November, 2019, as the trial is unlikely to conclude in the near future. The petition as such is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail to the satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate. However, it is made clear that anything observed herein shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

¶23

(MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) JUDGE

¶24

May 08, 2020

¶25

J.Ram

¶26

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

¶27

JAWALA RAM 2020.05.08 15:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Poonam @ Poona v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Poonam @ Poona 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

Rajender Kumar Vs State of Haryana and Another

Davinder Singh Kochar and Another Vs State of Haryana and Others

Puneet Kamal Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Others

Kamaljeet Kaur Vs State of Punjab

Sandeep Kumar @ Kaka Vs State of Punjab

Pala Singh Vs State of Punjab