Anticipatory bail petition under Section 438 CrPC in an IPC case; petitioners had joined investigation pursuant to interim bail orders. The State did not oppose and stated custodial interrogation was not required.
Interim bail orders dated 5.2.2024 and 22.4.2024 made absolute.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CRM-M No.5718 of 2024 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
205
CRM-M No.5718 of 2024
Date of decision : 22.7.2024
Sukhdev Singh @ Laddi and others ………….Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and another …….Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL
Present: Mr. Manmeet Singh, Advocate, for Mr. Gaurav Arora, Advocate, for the petitioner
Mr. Rajiv Verma, DAG, Punjab
Ms. Arshdeep Kaur, Advocate, for respondent no.2
SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL)
The instant petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C., has been filed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in FIR No.131 dated 9.12.2023, under Sections 458, 323, 325, 427, 506 , 148 and 149 of the IPC, 1860, registered at Police Station Longowal, District Sangrur.
Ashwani Kumar 2024.07.23 11:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CRM-M No.5718 of 2024 -2-
said fact and further submits that custodial interrogation of the petitioners
is not required.
(SANDEEP MOUDGIL) JUDGE
22.7.2024
Ashwani Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No
Ashwani Kumar 2024.07.23 11:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners who have joined the investigation and whose custodial interrogation is not required.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Sukhdev Singh @ Laddi and others
State of Punjab
Respondent no.2
Sandeep Moudgil
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
