Allowed

Chand Khan v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC26 Jul 2021CRM-M/1624/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana converted an interim anticipatory bail order into an absolute one. The petitioner joined the investigation in the erstwhile FIR involving cheating, gambling, and IT Act offences. The court found no current requisite for custodial interrogation.

What did the court decide?

Interim anticipatory bail order dated 16.01.2020 made absolute subject to conditions of Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

Chand Khan Vs State of Haryana — Bail and Remand | Punjab & Haryana HC (2021)

¶1

CRM-M-1624 of 2020

¶2

{1}

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM-M-1624 of 2020 Date of decision:26.07.2021

¶5

Chand Khan ... Petitioner

¶6

Vs.

¶7

State of Haryana ... Respondent

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL

¶9

Present:Mr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶10

Mr. Kuldeep Tiwari, Addl.A.G.Haryana.

¶11

SUVIR SEHGAL, J. (Oral)

¶12

The Court has been convened through video conferencing due to Covid-19 pandemic.

¶13

Through the instant petition, the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No.304 dated 10.07.2019 registered under Section 420 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 13A of Public Gambling Act, 1867 and Section 66-D of Information Technology Act, 2000 at Police Station Ferozepur Jhirka, District Nuh.

¶14

On 16.01.2020, following order was passed:-

¶15

“Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the order dated 17.12.2019 passed in CRM-M-33275 of 2019 titled as

¶16

SAVITA KADIAN 2021.07.26 16:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶17

CRM-M-1624 of 2020

¶18

{2}

¶19

'Khurshid Vs. State of Haryana' to contend that co-accused Khurshid has been granted anticipatory bail on 16.09.2019 which was made absolute by order dated 17.12.2019.

¶20

Notice of motion for 23.03.2020.

¶21

Meanwhile, the petitioner shall join the investigation and would come present as and when called for and in the event of arrest, he shall be admitted to interim bail on his furnishing personal and surety bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting Investigating Officer. He shall also abide by the conditions as specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

¶22

Learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Hansraj submits that the petitioner has joined investigation and is no longer required for custodial interrogation, though he is involved in another criminal case.

¶23

In view of the above facts, but without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the order dated 16.01.2020 granting interim bail to the petitioner is made absolute, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶24

(SUVIR SEHGAL) JUDGE

¶25

July 26, 2021 savita

¶26

Whether Speaking/Reasoned	Yes/No
Whether Reportable	Yes/No

¶27

SAVITA KADIAN 2021.07.26 16:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

Chand Khan v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chand Khan 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

Ranjit Kaur Vs State of Punjab

Mandeep Kaur Vs State of Punjab

Hardeep Kumar Vs State of Punjab

Satish Alias Bobby Vs State of Haryana and Others

Chanchal Singh and Anr. Vs State of Punjab

Sangram Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab