Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Lakhvir Singh vs State Of Punjab on 7 March, 2014

                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                                          CHANDIGARH
                                                *****
                                           CRM-M-8445-2014
                                           Date of Decision: 07.03.2014
            Lakhvir Singh                                                     ... Petitioner
                                            Versus
            State of Punjab                                                   ... Respondent
            CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHAVIR S. CHAUHAN

            Present :          Mr. Bikramjit Singh Jatana, Advocate,
                               for the petitioner.

            MAHAVIR S. CHAUHAN, J. (ORAL)

Heard.

Though, it is argued on behalf of the petitioner that the complainant is a habitual complainant, as is evident from the First Information Report (Annexure P-2) and complaints (Annexures P-3 and P-4) but, incidentally, neither the FIR nor the aforesaid complaints have reached their logical end and, as such, it is not possible to reach a conclusion, at this stage, as regards the contention that the complainant is a habitual complainant. Further, case of the prosecution is that the petitioner used sexually explicit language qua the complainant on mobile phone. The mobile phone stated to have been used by the petitioner is yet to be recovered and the language used by him is yet to be ascertained. Even otherwise, the investigation is yet to commence and for progress thereof, in-custody questioning of the petitioner may be necessary. If the petitioner is insulated with an order of anticipatory bail, the investigation shall be reduced to a mere ritual and inconsequential. In that event, justice alone shall be a casualty.

In these circumstances, no case is made out for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Dismissed.


            07.03.2014                                        (MAHAVIR S. CHAUHAN)
            adhikari                                               JUDGE




Virendra singh adhikari
2014.03.19 11:31
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
High Court Chandigarh