Allowed

Kabir Singh @ Kaku v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC16 Feb 2024CRM-M/3826/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought pre-arrest bail in an FIR alleging offences under Sections 452, 295, 323, 148, 149, and 506 IPC. After the petitioner joined the investigation and was no longer required for custodial interrogation, the Court made the interim bail order absolute, subject to statutory conditions and caveats against misuse.

What did the court decide?

Pre-arrest bail made absolute subject to conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

Kabir Singh @ Kaku Vs State of Punjab — Bail and Remand | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

202 2024:PHHC:022265 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

CRM-M-3826-2024 Date of decision : 16.02.2024

Kabir Singh @ Kaku

....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

....Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN

¶9

Present : Mr. Lovish Rattan, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶10

Mr. Jasjit Singh, DAG, Punjab.

¶11

PANKAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL)

¶12

On 24.01.2024, the following order was passed :-

¶13

“Apprehending his arrest in FIR No.228 dated 25.10.2023, registered for offences punishable under Sections 452, 295, 323, 148, 149, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Chheharta, District Amritsar, the petitioner has preferred this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking prearrest bail.

¶14

Ld. Counsel for the petitioner inter alia submits that even if the allegations levelled in the FIR are taken on its face value the same relate to brawl wherein the petitioner has been attributed fist blows and dang blows.

¶15

Issue notice of motion, returnable for 16.02.2024.

¶16

Mr. Tarun Aggarwal, Sr. DAG, Punjab appears and accepts notice on behalf of the respondent/State.

¶17

In the meantime, in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on interim bail subject to his furnishing personal and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/ Investigating Officer. As and when called, the petitioner shall join the investigation. He shall abide by the conditions enumerated under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

¶18

Deepak Kumar 2024.02.16 15:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-3826-2024

-2-

2024:PHHC:022265

Today, Ld. State Counsel on instructions from ASI Satnam Singh submits that the petitioner has already joined investigation and is no more required for custodial interrogation.

¶23

Without commenting on the merits of the case and in view of the aforesaid fact, order dated 24.01.2024 is made absolute, subject to the conditions as enumerated under Sections 438(2) Cr.P.C.

¶24

This order should not be treated as "blanket" order. It will not be read granting the petitioner indefinite protection from arrest. It shall be confined to the FIR mentioned ibid and will not operate in respect of any other incident that involves commission of an offence.

¶25

This order does not in any manner limit or restrict the rights or duties of the police or investigating agency to investigate into the charges against the petitioner.

¶26

The petitioner shall be deemed to be in custody for the purpose of Section 27 of the Evidence Act in regard to a discovery of facts made in pursuance of information supplied by the petitioner in case the occasion arises.

¶27

It will be open to the police or the investigating agency to move this Court for a direction under Section 439(2) Cr.P.C. to arrest the accused, in the event of violation of any term, such as absconding, noncooperating during investigation, evasion, intimidation or inducement to witnesses with a view to influence outcome of the investigation or trial.

¶28

Petition stands disposed off accordingly.

¶29

February 16, 2024 (Pankaj Jain) Dpr Judge Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

¶30

Deepak Kumar 2024.02.16 15:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Kabir Singh @ Kaku v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kabir Singh @ Kaku 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

Ginia Alias Gyani Ram Vs State of Haryana

Sandeep Kumar Vs State of Haryana

Gurlal @ Gurlal Singh Vs State of Haryana

Sonia and Another Vs State of Punjab and Others

Arshdeep Singh Vs State of Punjab

Harpreet Singh Vs State of Punjab