Allowed

Harpal Singh v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC1 Jul 2024CRM-M/12407/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought regular anticipatory bail after previously granted interim bail and subsequent cooperation with investigation. The court noted the petitioner's compliance and the State's stance that further interrogation was unnecessary, making the interim order absolute.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted by making the interim order absolute subject to conditions of Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

Harpal Singh Vs State of Haryana — Anticipatory Bail | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

207

¶3

CRM-M-12407-2024 Date of decision: 01.07.2024

¶4

Harpal Singh alias Pala Singh

.....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana

.....Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

¶10

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

¶11

Ms. Trishanjali Sharma, Advocate, for the respondent-State.

¶12

¶13

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL)

¶14

Th e petitioner is seeking the conc e ssion of anticipatory bail unde r Section 438 o f the Cr.P.C. in case FIR No. 3 12 dated 15.11.2023 unde r Sections 323, 324, 326, 506/34 of the Indian P enal Code, 1860, registered a t Police Station Sadar Ratia, District Fatehabad.

¶15

On the last date of hearing i.e. o n 11.03.2024, while noticing th e following subm i ssions made by the learned cou n sel for the petitioner, this Cour t had granted th e concession of interim bail to t he petitioner and asked him t o join investigati o n:-

¶16

“ L e arned counsel for the petition e r inter alia contends that th e pa r ties are immediate neighbour s and on account of a trivia l dis p ute pertaining to some kikkar b ushes which the petitioner wa s put t ing on his plot, occurrence in q u estion happened, however, he

¶17

PUSHPINDER SAINI 2024.07.03 00:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶18

CRM-M-12407-2024 -2-

¶19

su b mits that an exaggerated version has been brought forth in th e oc c urrence in question that the p etitioner inflicted two injurie s wit h a datar on the person of the c o mplainant including a grievou s inj u ry on the little finger of th e complainant. It has bee n su b mitted that the other injury attributed to the petitioner wa s opi n ed to be simple in nature .”

¶20

Le a rned counsel for the petitione r submits that in compliance o f order dated 11. 0 3.2024, the petitioner has join e d investigation and cooperate d with the investi g ating agency.

¶21

Le a rned State counsel, on instructi o ns, does not dispute the factu m of the petitio n er having joined investigati o n and cooperated with th e investigating a g ency. He, on further instructio n s, submits that the petitioner i s not required for further investigation much less f or his custodial interrogation.

¶22

In view of the above, the petitio n is allowed and interim orde r dated 11.03.20 2 4, is made absolute subject t o the conditions laid down i n Section 438(2) C r.P.C.

¶23

(MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) July 01, 2024 JUDGE ps Whether speaking/ reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

¶24

PUSHPINDER SAINI 2024.07.03 00:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Harpal Singh v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harpal Singh 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

Suman Rani and Another Vs State of Punjab and Others

Mr. Surinder Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Neetu and Another Vs State of Punjab and Others

Milan Vs State of Punjab

Arshdeep Singh Vs State of Punjab

Om Parkash @ Ghudda Vs State of Punjab