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 11, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Satbir Singh vs State Of Haryana on 23 November, 2022

Author: Avneesh Jhingan

Bench: Avneesh Jhingan

201   IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                       CHANDIGARH

                                      CRM-M-46996-2022 (O&M)
                                      Date of Decision: 23rd November, 2022
Satbir Singh
                                                                               ... Petitioner
                              Versus

State of Haryana
                                                                          ... Respondent

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN

Present :      Mr. Gautam Dutt, Advocate for the petitioner.
               Ms. Geeta Sharma, DAG, Haryana.
                                ***

AVNEESH JHINGAN , J.(Oral)

This petition is filed seeking anticipatory bail in case of FIR No. 23, dated 15th July, 2022, under Sections 120-B, 166, 167, 201, 218, 409 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 13 (2), 13(1) (c), 13(1) (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act'), (Section 7, 8, 11, 13, 13(1)(A)(B), 13(1d) (2) of the Act added later on), registered at P.S. SVB, Faridabad, District State Vigilance Bureau.

On 14th October, 2022, while issuing notice of motion, following order was passed:-

"Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present FIR is result of Enquiry No. 6 dated 10.5.2019, out of which two FIRs were registered and in one FIR, the petitioner has been granted regular bail by this court. He further submits that the petitioner was in custody in other FIR from 6.4.2022 to 1.10.2022, no production warrant was taken in spite of the fact that the present FIR is dated 15.7.2022.
Notice of motion.
Ms. Geeta Sharma, DAG, Haryana appearing on advance notice accepts the same and seeks time to have instructions.
List on 1.11.2022."

Learned State counsel has filed reply. Learned State counsel on instructions submits that at present, since sanction under the Act of co-accused is awaited, 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 24-11-2022 08:13:42 ::: CRM-M-46996-2022 (O&M) -2- investigation is not proceeding, in case custody of the petitioner is required he would be given four days clear notice.

In view of the above, no further orders are called for. The petition is disposed of.

Since the main petition has been disposed of, pending applications, if any, rendered infructuous.

(AVNEESH JHINGAN ) JUDGE rd 23 November, 2022 Parveen Sharma Whether reasoned/speaking Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No 2 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 24-11-2022 08:13:42 :::