Allowed

Ranjit Kaur v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC23 Jul 2021CRM-M/38574/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the petitioner's petition to make an interim pre-arrest bail order absolute under Section 438 CrPC. The court set aside the condition requiring investigation joining as the petitioner had already complied, citing that no custodial interrogation was currently needed.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 11.09.2019 granting interim bail is made absolute; condition to join investigation deleted as it was fulfilled.

Ranjit Kaur Vs State of Punjab — Anticipatory Bail | Punjab & Haryana HC (2021)

¶1

CRM-M-38574 of 2019

¶2

{1}

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

202-2 CRM-M-38574 of 2019 Date of decision:23.07.2021

¶5

Ranjit Kaur ... Petitioner Vs.

¶6

State of Punjab ... Respondent

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL

¶8

Present:Mr. B.S.Bhalla, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶9

Mr. Sandeep Singh Deol, DAG, Punjab.

¶10

Mr. Shashi Kumar Yadav, Advocate for the complainant.

¶11

SUVIR SEHGAL, J. (Oral)

¶12

The Court has been convened through video conferencing due

¶13

to Covid-19 pandemic.

¶14

On 11.09.2019, following order was passed:-

¶15

“Present petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for seeking prearrest bail to the petitioner, namely Ranjit Kaur mother of Jagdeep Singh, who is the main accused, in case FIR No. 73 dated 25.07.2019, registered under Section(s) 408, 420, 465, 468, 471 & 120-B IPC at Police Station Ajitwal, District Moga. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that petitioner has no role in the case and she has been falsely implicated being the mother of Jagdeep Singh. Learned counsel further

¶16

SAVITA KADIAN 2021.07.23 17:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶17

CRM-M-38574 of 2019

¶18

{2}

¶19

contended that petitioner is not involved in any business transaction and had not signed any document at any stage and still she is ready to join the investigation. Learned counsel further contended that similar petition has been filed by coaccused of the petitioner, namely Ramandeep Kaur vide CRMM-35188-2019, wherein notice of motion has been issued and she was directed to join the investigation as well and the same is listed for hearing on 03.10.2019.

¶20

Notice of motion.

¶21

On asking of the Court, Mr. Ramandeep Sandhu, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent, whereas Mr. Shashi Kumar Yadav, Advocate, who is present in the Court, has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant and filed his memorandum of appearance. A copy of paper-book be provided to them during the course of the day.

¶22

List on 03.10.2019 along with petition i.e. CRM-M-351882019.

¶23

Meanwhile, petitioner(s) is directed to join the investigation. In the event of arrest, petitioner(s) shall be released on interim bail to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. The petitioner(s) will join the investigation as and when called for and shall also abide by the conditions as specified under

¶24

SAVITA KADIAN 2021.07.23 17:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶25

CRM-M-38574 of 2019

¶26

{3}

¶27

Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.”

¶28

Learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Dharampal Singh submits that the petitioner has joined investigation and is no longer required for custodial interrogation. He has further instructions to submit that no other case is pending against the petitioner.

¶29

In view of the above facts, but without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the order dated 11.09.2019 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.

¶30

	(SUVIR SEHGAL) JUDGE
July 23, 2021 savita
Whether Speaking/Reasoned	Yes/No
Whether Reportable	Yes/No

¶31

SAVITA KADIAN 2021.07.23 17:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

Ranjit Kaur v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjit Kaur 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

Veer Bhan Vs State of Haryana

Mohinder Bansal Vs State of Punjab

Bali Ram @ Harman Vs State of Punjab

Krishan Kumar Arora Vs State of Punjab

Vikas Vs State of Haryana

Surjit Singh Vs State of Punjab