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 8, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Shaik Hussain vs State Of Ut Chandigarh on 17 August, 2023

Author: Pankaj Jain

Bench: Pankaj Jain

CRM-M No.4713 of 2023 (O&M) dn 2023: PHHC:106356

206 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH

CRM-M No.4713 of 2023 (O&M)
Date of decision : 17.08.2023

Shaik Hussain eee Petitioner
versus

StateofU.T.Chandigath Respondent

CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN

ke

Present :- Mr. H.S.Randhawa, Advocate for
Mr. P.S.Ahluwalia, Advocate
for the petitioner.

Mr. Tarun Seth, Advocate for
Mr. Sumit Jain, Addl. P.P., UT., Chandigarh.

REE

PANKAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL)

1 The petitioner has prayed for grant of pre-arrest bail in FIR No.89 dated 25.05.2022 registered under Sections 409/420/468/471/120-B IPC at Police Station Industrial Area, Chandigarh.

2 While issuing notice of motion on 01.02.2023 the following order was passed:-

"Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was never named in the FIR. He further submits that the loan in question was disbursed at the instance of one Ujjawal Singh, who happened to be the Branch Manager at the concerned point of time and named the petitioner in his disclosure. Learned counsel also submits that the petitioner has been named at the instance of Ujjawal Singh only on account of his vindictive attitude as the petitioner being the superior authority had withdrawn his powers as Branch Manager and transferred him to Zonal Office for further investigation which can prima facie be ascertained from the correspondence annexures P-6 & P-7 attached with the present petition. 5003.08.18 18-43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.4713 of 2023 (O&M) 2h 2023: PHHC:106356 Notice of motion for 15.02.2023.
Mr. Sumit Jain, Standing counsel for UT, who is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent and seeks time to have instructions.
In the meanwhile, petitioner will join investigation before the Investigating Officer on 02.02.2023 at 4.30 pm. In the event of his arrest, the Arresting Officer would admit him to interim bail, till the next date of hearing, on his furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds to his satisfaction. The petitioner is directed to abide by all the conditions as envisaged under Section 438(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973."

3 Today, Mr. Tarun Seth, Advocate for Mr. Sumit Jain, Addl. PP, UT, on instructions from Investigating Officer has stated that pursuant to the order dated 01.02.2023 the petitioner has joined investigation and is no longer required for custodial interrogation.

4 In view of above the interim order dated 01.02.2023 passed by this Court is made absolute, subject to the conditions as enumerated under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

5 This order should not be treated as "blanket" order. It will not be read granting petitioner indefinite protection from arrest. It shall be confined to the FIR mentioned ibid and will not operate in respect of any other incident that involves commission of an offence.

6 This order does not in any manner limit or restrict the rights or duties of the police or investigating agency, to investigate into the charges against the petitioner.

7 The petitioner shall be deemed to be in custody for the purpose of Section 27 of the Evidence Act, 1872 in regard to a discovery of facts made in pursuance of information supplied by the petitioner in case the occasion arises.

POOJA SHARMA 2023.08.18 18:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M No.4713 of 2023 (O&M) 23h 2023: PHHC:106356 8 It will be open to the police or the investigating agency to move this court for a direction under Section 439 (2) Cr.P.C. to arrest the accused, in the event of violation of any term, such as absconding, non-cooperating during investigation, evasion, intimidation or inducement to witnesses with a view to influence outcome of the investigation or trial.

9 Needless to say that anything observed herein shall not be construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case.

(PANKAJ JAIN ) JUDGE 17.08.2023 Pooja sharma-I Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether Reportable : No POOJA SHARMA 2023.08.18 18:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document