Hardeep Singh And Anr vs State Of Punjab on 17 April, 2018

[Cites 10, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Hardeep Singh And Anr vs State Of Punjab on 17 April, 2018

Bench: Mahabir Singh Sindhu

CRM-M-9399-2018                                                 -1-


            IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                         CHANDIGARH


                                 CRM-M-9399-2018
                                 Date of decision: - 17.04.2018
Hardeep Singh and another
                                                                  .....Petitioners

                                   Versus

State of Punjab
                                                                 .....Respondent



CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU



Present:      Mr. Bhoop Singh, Advocate
              for the petitioners.

              Mr. Harbir Sandhu, AAG, Punjab.

              Mr. Vishal Sharma, Advocate
              for the complainant.

                          ****

MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU, J. (ORAL)

Present petition has been filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) for grant of concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in case FIR No.17 dated 15.01.2018, under Sections 177, 419, 420, 465, 467, 468 and 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Salem Tabri, Ludhiana.

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that in pursuance of order dated 07.03.2018, the petitioners have joined the investigation on 06.04.2018 and their custodial interrogation is no longer required.

1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 06-05-2018 09:41:15 ::: CRM-M-9399-2018 -2- The above factual position is duly acknowledged by learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Jatinder Kumar, by submitting that the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required in this case.

Although learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the bail application by stating that it is a serious matter, but keeping in view the fact that the petitioners have already joined the investigation and their custodial interrogation is not required by the police. therefore, order dated 07.03.2018 is made absolute, subject to the provisions of Section 438(2) Cr. P.C. The above observations may not be construed as an expression of opinion on merits of the case.

Accordingly, the present petition stands disposed off.




                                     ( MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU)
April 17, 2018                               JUDGE
naresh.k

            Whether reportable?                       Yes
            Whether reasoned/speaking?                Yes




                                     2 of 2
                  ::: Downloaded on - 06-05-2018 09:41:16 :::

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Punjab-Haryana High Court