Allowed

Harmandeep Singh v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC12 Mar 2024CRM-M/6077/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail petition in an FIR for hurt and unlawful assembly offences where injuries attributed were simple. The petitioner joined investigation pursuant to the earlier order and the State stated custodial interrogation was not required; the court confirmed interim bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Interim bail granted on 21.02.2024 confirmed under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C., subject to conditions including future cooperation in investigation.

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

¶1

N.C. No.2024:PHHC:035188 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

218

¶3

CRM-M-6077-2024 (O&M) Date of decision: 12.03.2024

HARMANDEEP SINGH

....Petitioner(s)

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB

...Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY

¶10

Present : Mr. Sarabjit Singh Cheema and Mr. Jatinder Pal Singh, Advocates for the petitioner.

¶11

Mr. Ankit Grewal, DAG Punjab.

¶12

¶13

SANJIV BERRY. J. (Oral)

¶14

By way of present petition filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR (Annexure P-1) as under:

¶15

FIR No.	Dated	Sections	Police Station
149	25.10.2023	324, 323, 148, 149 IPC;	Kot Ise Khan,
		(326 IPC added vide G.D.	District Moga
		No.26 dated 26.10.2023)

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in compliance to the order dated 21.02.2024 passed by this Court, the petitioner has already joined the investigation and as such interim bail granted to the petitioner may be confirmed.

¶17

Learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Gurmail Singh, has intimated that the petitioner has joined investigation and is no more required for any custodial investigation in this case nor he is required for further investigation. 4. Heard.

¶18

During the course of hearing on 21.02.2024, the following order was

¶19

SANDAL SHARMA 2024.03.12 18:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

¶20

N.C. No.2024:PHHC:035188

¶21

CRM-M-6077-2024 (O&M)

¶22

-2-

¶23

passed:-

¶24

“3. It is, inter alia, contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further contends that as per the allegations, injuries attributed to the petitioner are simple in nature and there is no other case registered against the petitioner, who is aged about 19 years. He further contends that the petitioner is ready to join investigation.

¶25

4. Per contra, learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Nachattar Singh, P.S. Kot Ise Khan, submits that the injuries attributed to the petitioner, as per the allegations levelled by the complainant, are simple in nature and there is no other case pending against him.

¶26

5. List on 12.03.2024.

¶27

6. In the meanwhile, the petitioner is hereby directed to join investigation within seven days from today and in the event of his arrest, he is ordered to be released on interim bail on his furnishing personal/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer. He shall also abide by conditions as envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.”

¶28

Keeping in view the above submissions made by learned State counsel and the fact that the petitioner had joined the investigation consequent to the order dated 21.02.2024 passed by this Court, interim bail granted vide order dated 21.02.2024 is hereby confirmed, subject to conditions as envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. Further the petitioner is directed to join investigation as and when required in future by way of written notice for such purpose to be served by Investigating Officer of this case upon the petitioner; he will not tamper with the evidence nor will influence the witnesses and will not leave the country without prior permission of the Court.

¶29

7 . The petition stands allowed.

¶30

	(SANJIV BERRY) JUDGE
12.03.2024
S.Sharma(syr)
Whether speaking/reasoned	: Yes/No
Whether reportable	: Yes/ No

¶31

SANDAL SHARMA 2024.03.12 18:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

Harmandeep Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harmandeep Singh 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

Surjeet Singh Vs State of Haryana

Monika Vs State of Haryana

Manjeet Singh Vs State of Haryana

Kamle Alam Alias Kamre Alam Alias Nanki Vs State of Punjab

Samar Singh @ Bittu Vs State of Haryana and Another

Bhag Chand Thapar and Others Vs State of Ut Chandigarh and Ors.