Talvinder Singh v. State Of Haryana And Another
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 25.03.2021 Talvinder Singh
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMOL RATTAN SINGH Present:- Mr. Parminder Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Surender Singh, AAG, Haryana Amol Rattan Singh, J. (Oral) Case heard by way of video conferencing.
On 21.01.2021, the following order had been passed: "
! ! !
"
#
$ % &&
#
' '(') ()!* "#
'+ ,+ ,- ##. +"
- ,-
/ 0
& & 1
1 & & 2%&
1 &
"1
.
1 & 1 & 1
&4 &
3
-5"6 &
-2- ) ! ! . #37 "
#
$ 2 / ! ! 1
1 1 + ,1
8 & &&
& &
1 2#:
$-;3 -< )' ! -=
5 5 1 / ! ! . ) ! ! #37"
#
+ -5"6 , &1
<
& <
4
(42 3 & 1
#
'/+ , " <
1 4 2
&& 1 1 && & <
&
& -
6& #
> Today, learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Ajmer Singh, submits that the petitioner in this petition has joined investigation and
-3presently at least his custodial interrogation is not required. That being so, without making any comment on the actual merits of the case, whatsoever, since the investigating agency itself does not require the custodial interrogation of the petitioner, this petition has in fact been rendered infructuous and is disposed of as such. However, if the petitioners' custodial interrogation is required at any stage hereinafter, in the context of the FIR in question, he would be given 10 days notice before arrest, duly shown to be served upon him. Naturally, if the complainant is aggrieved in any manner, of lack of proper investigation, he/she would be always at liberty to avail of his/her remedy as per law.
25.03.2021 (AMOL RATTAN SINGH) vcgarg JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking: Yes Whether reportable:
No