SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Raj Pal Singh vs State Of Punjab on 6 December, 2017

207 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH

Criminal Misc. No. M- 4986 of 2017 (OM)
Date of decision : December 06, 2017

Raj Pal Singh …..Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and another ….Respondents

CORAM:- HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL

Present: Mr. Yogesh Kumar Aneja, Advocate
for the petitioner.

Mr. Rahul Rathore, DAG, Punjab.

Mr. H.S. Jakhal, Advocate
for respondent No. 2.
***

LISA GILL, J.

Prayer in this petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to the

petitioner in FIR No. 164 dated 18.11.2016 under Section 406/498A IPC

registered at Police Station Guruharsahai.

It is informed that during the pendency of this petition, the

petitioner and the complainant – respondent No. 2 have decided to part

ways. Petition under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 has been

filed. Their statements at first motion in the said petition have been recorded

on 31.10.2017. Certified copies of the said petition as well as the statements

produced in Court today are taken on record subject to just exceptions. It is

stated by the complainant in the said proceedings that her claim qua the

petitioner in regard to the maintenance, alimony etc. stands satisfied. The

petitioner, it is submitted, undertakes to abide by the conditions of the

settlement. It is, thus, prayed that this petition be allowed.

1 of 2
10-12-2017 12:48:17 :::
Criminal Misc. No. M- 4986 of 2017 (OM) -2-

Learned counsel for the complainant verifies and affirms the

factum of settlement between the parties. It is submitted that the

complainant has no objection, in case, this petition is allowed.

Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI

Sukhchain Singh, verifies that the petitioner has joined investigation.

Moreover, the factum of settlement has also been brought to the notice of

the police authorities.

There are no allegations on behalf of the State that the

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.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances noted above but

without expressing any opinion on the merits of case, it is considered just

and expedient to allow this petition. Consequently, order dated 16.02.2017

is made absolute.

(Lisa Gill)
December 06, 2017 Judge
rts
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No

Whether reportable : Yes/No

2 of 2
10-12-2017 12:48:19 :::

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2018 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please CLICK HERE to read Group Rules, If You agree then JOIN HERE

We handle Women centric biased laws like False 498A, Domestic Violence(DVACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA24, 125 CrPc, 307, 313, 376, 377, 406, 420, 506, 509 etc

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh