Allowed

Poonam v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC23 Nov 2023CRM-M/52706/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court allowed the petition seeking anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The interim bail granted earlier was made absolute, directing the petitioner to continue cooperating with the investigation.

What did the court decide?

Interim bail granted vide order dated 17.10.2023 was made absolute; petitioner directed to join investigation.

Poonam Vs State of Haryana — Corruption | Punjab & Haryana HC (2023)

¶1

��

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

CRM-M-52706-2023

¶4

101

¶5

Date of Decision: 23.11.2023

¶6

Poonam ......... Pe��oner

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Haryana ......... Respondent

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

¶10

Present:Mr. Munish Gupta, Advocate, Mr. Dinesh Monga, Advocate, Ms. Monika Shahi, Advocate and Ms. Laiman Rani, Advocate for the pe��oner.

¶11

Ms. Shubhra Singh, Addl. A.G., Haryana assisted by DSP Surender Singh, Punhana, District Nuh.

¶12

¶13

ANOOP CHITKARA, J. (ORAL)

¶14

FIR No.	Dated	Police Sta0on	Sec0ons
554	25.09.2020	Camp Palwal, District	420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC and
		Palwal	8 and 13(1) (d) of Preven�on of
			Corrup�on Act, 1988 (Sec�on 201
			IPC added later on)

¶15

The pe��oner apprehending the arrest in the FIR cap�oned above, has come

¶16

up before this Court under Sec�on 438 Cr.P.C seeking bail.

¶17

Vide order dated 17.10.2023, this Court had granted interim bail to the

¶18

pe��oner which is con�nuing �ll date.

¶19

State counsel on instruc�ons from DSP Surender Singh submits that although the pe��oner did not co-operate with the inves�gator but she be directed to con�nue join the inves�ga�on.

¶20

The incident pertains to the year 2020 and the fact that as per the inves�ga�on and allega�ons, the pe��oner's role was only to enter the data which was duly approved by the Superior Officer of RTO Office and her name surfaced in disclosure statement and she had worked there from 15.01.2020 to 28.06.2020 and during her tenure

¶21

JYOTI 2023.11.24 08:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

CRM-M-52706-2023

-2-

2023:PHHC:149138

of pos�ng COVID-19 lock down had also come in force from 23^rd March, 2020.

¶26

In the en�rety of facts and circumstances, the present pe��on is allowed and

¶27

interim bail granted vide order dated 17.10.2023 is made absolute. All pending miscellaneous applica�ons, if any, stand disposed of.

¶28

(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE

¶29

23.11.2023

¶30

Jyo�-II

¶31

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

¶32

JYOTI 2023.11.24 08:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

Poonam v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Poonam 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

Balwant Singh Vs State of Punjab

Naib Singh @ Nayab Singh Vs State of Haryana

Brij Mohan Singh Vs State of Haryana

Harjinder Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Others

Deepak Shekhawat Vs State of Haryana and Another

Vijay Singh Vs State of Haryana