Punjab-Haryana High Court
Pritam Singh vs State Of Punjab on 11 February, 2014
Author: Ram Chand Gupta
Bench: Ram Chand Gupta
CRM No.M-427 of 2014 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Crl. Misc. No. M- 427 of 2014(O&M)
Date of Decision: February 11, 2014.
Pritam Singh
...... PETITIONER(s)
Versus
State of Punjab
...... RESPONDENT (s)
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA
Present: Mr. Anter Singh Brar,
Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Gurveer Sidhu, AAG, Punjab.
*****
RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral)
The present petition has been filed for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure in FIR no.76 dated 02.12.2013, under Sections 379/431/427 IPC and Section 70(4) of the Canal Act, 1873, registered at police station Sadar Malout, District Muktsar.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record including the impugned order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sri Muktsar Sahib dismissing anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner. Singh Omkar 2014.02.12 15:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CRM No.M-427 of 2014 2
This Court while issuing notice of motion on 10.01.2014 passed the following order:-
"Contends that petitioner is more than 70 years of age and that in fact dispute is over irrigating the fields as both the parties have adjoining fields. It is further submitted that son of the petitioner has already been arrested in this case and the tractor trolly which was allegedly used in committing the crime has already been recovered from him. It is further submitted that there are only general allegations and there is no specific allegation against the petitioner-accused.
Notice of motion to Advocate General, Punjab, for 11.2.2014.
However, in the meantime, petitioner is directed to join the investigation and in case he is arrested, he shall be released on interim bail by the Arresting Officer to his satisfaction subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C."
It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has already joined the investigation pursuant to said order dated 10.01.2014.
It has also been stated by learned counsel for the State that petitioner has joined the investigation and that he is no more required for any custodial interrogation. Bail application is not opposed.
There are no allegations on behalf of the State that petitioner is likely to abscond or that he is likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts in the Court, if released on bail.
Hence, in view of these facts and without expressing any Singh Omkar 2014.02.12 15:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CRM No.M-427 of 2014 3 opinion on the merits of the case, the anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of Pritam Singh is accepted and order dated 10.01.2014 granting interim bail in favour of the petitioner is, hereby, made absolute subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
The present petition stands disposed of accordingly.
( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) February 11, 2014. JUDGE 'om' Singh Omkar 2014.02.12 15:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh