Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Ramla Singla vs State Of Punjab on 16 September, 2015
Bench: T.S. Thakur, Kurian Joseph
1
ITEM NO.7 COURT NO.2 SECTION IIB
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 9848/2013
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 25/03/2013
in CRM No. 22353/2012 passed by the High Court Of Punjab & Haryana
At Chandigarh)
RAMLA SINGLA Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS Respondent(s)
(with appln. (s) for permission to file additional documents and
stay of arrest and office report)
Date : 16/09/2015 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sonit Sinhmar, Adv.
Mr. Balbir Singh Gupta,Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Jayant K.Sud, AAG,
MS. Jasleen Chahal, Adv.
Mr. Ajay P.Yushir, Adv.
Mr. Kuldip Singh,Adv.
Mr. I.P.S.Kohli, Adv.
Mr. Subhasish Bhowmick,Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Leave granted.
The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed order. Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by Shashi Sareen Date: 2015.09.19 05:45:44 IST Reason:
(Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera)
AR-cum-PS Court Master
(Signed order is placed on the file) 2 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1227 OF 2015 (Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No.9848 of 2013) RAMILA SINGLA ... Appellant(s) Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. ... Respondent(s) O R D E R Leave granted.
The High Court has by the impugned order declined anticipatory bail to the appellant in connection with FIR No. 54 dated 11.05.2012 for offences punishable under Sections 307, 406, 498-A, 323 and 34, Indian Penal Code registered at police station City Jagraon, District Ludhiana.
When the matter came up before us on 29.11.2013 we had directed that in the event of the appellant's arrest in connection with the case mentioned above, he shall be enlarged on bail on his furnishing bail bonds in a sum of Rs 20,000/- with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Officer effecting the arrest. Learned counsel for the appellant now submits that the appellant has already furnished the requisite bail 3 bonds. He further submits that the parties have also negotiated a settlement as is evident from a reading of the statement recorded by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana in Criminal Revision No. 180 of 2014. One of the aspects of the Settlement appears to be the willingness of the parties to dissolve the marriage by filing a joint petition under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act and payment of Rs. 14,00,000/- by the husband to the estranged wife towards maintenance. Be that as it may the parties appear to be in the process of dissolving the marital bond and settling the related issues between themselves. In that view we see no reason why the direction already issued by us should not be made absolute. We accordingly allow the appeal, set-aside the order passed by the High Court and made our Order dated 29.11.2013 absolute.
.................J. (T.S.THAKUR) ..................J. (KURIAN JOSEPH) New Delhi, Dated: 16th September, 2015.