Tasbir Singh v. State Of Punjab And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-1648-2024 Date of decision: May 15th, 2025 Tasbir Singh .....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and another .....Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present:

Mr. Akhilesh Vyas, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. H.S. Deol, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. G.B.S. Dhillon, Advocate for respondent No.2.

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J.

Learned counsel for the petitioner is seeking cancellation of bail granted to respondent No.2 in FIR No.106 dated 07.09.2023 under Section 420 of the IPC registered at Police Station D Division, Police Commissionerate, Amritsar, primarily on the ground that wrong instructions had been received by the learned State counsel when the order dated 24.11.2023 was passed by this Court allowing the anticipatory bail petition of respondent No.2. 2.

It has been submitted that no doubt, the State Counsel, as per instructions received, did apprise the Court that respondent No.2 in compliance of order dated 17.11.2023 had joined investigation and cooperated with the investigating agency, as a result of which his custodial interrogation was not required, however, totally incorrect instructions had been received by the learned State counsel, which were thereafter notices in the said order as well qua the parties having PUNEET SACHDEVA 2025.05.15 18:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M-1648-2024 -2amicably settled their dispute. Learned counsel has asserted that no such compromise has been arrived at between the parties. In addition, it has also been submitted that respondent No.2 had not approached this Court with clean hands as he had withheld from this Court that a Civil Writ Petition had also been preferred by him before this Court. 3.

On a pointed query put to the learned counsel for the petitioner/complainant as to whether respondent No.2 had breached any condition or misused the concession of bail, which was granted to him vide order dated 24.11.2023, he has fairly replied in the negative. 4.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant material on record.

5.

No ground is made out to the accept the prayer made in the instant petition for cancellation of bail, more so when the orders dated 17.11.2023 and 24.11.2023 were passed in the presence of the counsel for the petitioner.

6.

Accordingly, the instant petition stands dismissed. May 15th, 2025 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Puneet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes Whether reportable :

No PUNEET SACHDEVA 2025.05.15 18:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh