Allowed

Milan v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC1 Jul 2024CRM-M/13867/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana, in a judgment delivered by Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul on 01.07.2024, allowed the bail petition filed by Milan under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The court observed that the investigation was complete, a compromise had been effected between parties, and the prime accused had already been granted bail.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner admitted to bail on furnishing bail/suret y bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

Milan Vs State of Punjab — Cheating and Forgery | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

211 IN THE H IGH COURT OF PUNJAB A N D HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

CRM-M-13867 - 2024 Date of Decisio n : 01.07.2024

¶3

Milan …Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

State of Punjab ….Respondent

¶6

CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

¶7

Present: Mr. M.R. Sharma, Advocate for th e petitioner. Mr. Amit Rana, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

¶8

¶9

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL)

¶10

Th e petitioner is seeking the conc e ssion of bail under Section 43 9 of the Cr.P.C. i n case FIR No.243 dated 23.0 8 .2023 under Sections 406, 420 , 120-B of the I P C and under Section 66 (D) o f Information Technology Act , 2000, registere d at Police Station Zirakpur, Dist r ict SAS Nagar (Mohali). 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the prime accused in the instant case is Manisha Chauhan, who has since been exte n ded the concession of regular b ail by this Court vide order dated 07.05.20 2 4 in CRM-M-55271 of 2023. It has also been submitted that vide order dated 23.05.2024, a Coordin a te Bench of this Court had granted the co n cession of interim bail to t h e petitioner in view of a compromise ef fe cted between the parties. Lear n ed counsel submits that the parties would b e approaching this Court un d er Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FI R in question very shortly.

¶11

PUSHPINDER SAINI 2024.07.03 06:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶12

CRM-M-13867 - 2024 -2-

¶13

On a pointed query put to the learned counsel as to whether the petitioner has a n y other criminal antecedents, h e has categorically replied in the negative. It has also been submitted that af t er the petitioner was arrested on 26.08.2023, investigation had been complet e d, challan presented and on the next date of hearing, the charges are likely t o be framed.

¶14

Le a rned State counsel, on instru c tions, has not disputed that Manisha Chau h an, who is the prime accused in the case in question, has already been r e leased on bail by this Court vi d e order dated 07.05.2024. It has also not be e n disputed that the petitioner i s not involved in any other criminal case. Learned counsel, however, has feigned ignorance about the purported com p romise stated to have been e f fected between the parties. Learned State counsel, on instructions, h as not disputed that the investigation i n the case in hand is complete a n d challan stands presented. 4. I h ave heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material placed on record. 5. Th e petitioner has been in cust o dy since 26.08.2023 in a magisterial tria l . The trial is unlikely to conclude in the near future. In addition, the pa r ties have also compromised the matter.

¶15

In t he facts and circumstances as e numerated hereinabove, this Court deems it fit to extend the concession o f bail to the petitioner as no further incarcer a tion of the petitioner is require d . 7. A c cordingly, the instant petition i s allowed and the petitioner be admitted to b ail on his furnishing bail/suret y bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/ D uty Magistrate concerned. Ho w ever, it is made clear that

¶16

PUSHPINDER SAINI 2024.07.03 06:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶17

CRM-M-13867 - 2024 -3-

¶18

anything obser v ed hereinabove shall not be co n strued to be an expression of

¶19

opinion on the m erits of the case.

¶20

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

¶21

PUSHPINDER SAINI 2024.07.03 06:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Milan v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Milan 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

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

Harpal Singh Vs State of Haryana

Arshdeep Singh Vs State of Punjab

Om Parkash @ Ghudda Vs State of Punjab