SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Satinderpal Singh vs State Of Punjab And Anr on 17 April, 2017

CRM-M-3986 of 2017 -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

1. CRM-M-3986 of 2017
Date of Decision: 17.04.2017

Satinderpal Singh ….Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Punjab ….Respondent

2. CRM-M-4943 of 2017

Karamjit Singh and others ….Petitioners

VERSUS

State of Punjab ….Respondent

CORAM:- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA

Present: Mr. K.S. Sidhu , Advocate
for petitioners in both the petitions.

Ms. Bhavna Gupta, DAG, Punjab.

Mr. Karan Gupta, Advocate
for Mr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate
for the complainant.

*******

SURINDER GUPTA, J.(Oral)

Present petitions have been filed under Section 438 Code of

Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail to petitioners in case FIR

No. 11 dated 18.01.2017 registered for the offence punishable under Section

406 of Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC‘), at Police Station Patran, District

Patiala.

Heard.

Learned counsel for the complainant submits that he has

instructions to submit that parties have amicably settled the dispute

pertaining to FIR in question and other matters pending between the parties.

1 of 2
22-04-2017 00:03:58 :::
CRM-M-3986 of 2017 -2-

Learned State counsel also submits that parties have given copy

of compromise to the Investigating Officer and the offence punishable

under Section 406 IPC is compoundable. She further submits that

petitioners have joined the investigation under orders dated 08.02.2017 and

16.02.2017 passed in respective petitions and their custodial interrogation is

no more required.

In view of above but without expressing any opinion on the

merits of the case, these petitions are allowed and orders dated 08.02.2017

and 16.02.2017 passed in respective petitions are made absolute till the

presentation of challan, subject to the following terms:-

(i) that petitioners shall make themselves available for
interrogation by the police as and when required;

(ii) that petitioners shall not, directly or indirectly, make any
inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted
with the facts of the accusation against them so as to
dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or
to any police officer;

(iii) that petitioners shall not leave India without the prior
permission of the Court.

(iv) that petitioners will seek regular bail on the presentation
of challan in Court.

April 17, 2017 ( SURINDER GUPTA )
jk JUDGE

Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No

Whether reportable Yes/No

2 of 2
22-04-2017 00:04:00 :::

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 © 2021 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