SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Gurpreet Singh @ Mitthu & Anr vs State Of Punjab on 15 September, 2017

CRM-M-12599-2017 (OM) -1-


CRM-M-12599-2017 (OM)
Date of decision : 15.09.2017

Gurpreet Singh @ Mitthu and another

State of Punjab


Present: Mr. Navjot Singh, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. A.S. Gill, Sr. DAG, Punjab,
assisted by HC Gurmit Singh.


The petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in case FIR No.21 dated

06.03.2017, registered under Sections 354, 323 and 506 read with Section

34 of the Indian Penal Code, at Police Station Amloh.


On 13.04.2017, the following order was passed:-

“Counsel inter alia submits that the non-
bailable offence is under Section 354 IPC and even as
per the FIR itself, on account of a fight within the
complainant’s family, the petitioners who are
neighbours, had gone to the house to protest on account
of noise being raised. It is submitted that there is a delay
of 4 days in lodging the FIR and initially in the Kalandra
under Section 107/151 IPC, there was no such allegation
of outraging the modesty of the complainant Manjeet
Kaur. Reference is made to Annexure P-2. It is submitted
that no recovery as such is to be effected from the

1 of 2
18-09-2017 23:40:25 :::
CRM-M-12599-2017 (OM) -2-

Notice of motion.

On the asking of the Court, Mr. R.S. Pathania, DAG,
Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent. Copy
of the paper book has been supplied to him in Court.

Adjourned to 17.05.2017.

In the meanwhile, it is directed that the petitioners
shall join investigation and in the event of arrest of the
petitioners, they shall be released on ad-interim bail by
the investigating officer and shall comply with the
conditions laid down in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.”

It is stated that the matter has been compromised between the

parties. A copy of the compromise has been furnished in the Court, which is

taken on record as Mark ‘A’.

Learned State counsel, on instructions, submits that in

pursuance of the order passed by this Court, the petitioners have joined the

investigation and they are not required for custodial interrogation.

In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on the

merits of the case, the interim bail granted by this Court vide order dated

13.04.2017, is made absolute, subject to furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds

to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate


The petition stands allowed.

atulsethi JUDGE

Whether speaking / reasoned : Yes No

Whether Reportable : Yes No

2 of 2
18-09-2017 23:40:27 :::

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
MyNation Times Magzine

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


Copyright © 2024 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 read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation