Kanwaljit Singh v. State Of Punjab

In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh CRM-M-4111-2019 (O&M) Date of Decision:-4.9.2019 Kanwaljit Singh ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL Present:- Mr. Rajesh Kumar Girdhar, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Rashmi Attri, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, assited by ASI Rajdavinder Singh.

***** GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J.(Oral) CRM-25236-2019 In view of the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed and a copy of compromise dated 9.4.2019 annexed with the application is taken on record as Annexure P-3.

CRM-M-4111-2019 1.

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking grant of anticipatory bail in respect of a case registered vide FIR No.93 dated 12.9.2018 at Police Station Bariwala, District Sri Muktsar Sahib under Sections 294, 509, 323 and 325 of Indian Penal Code, wherein offence under Section 452 IPC was added later on vide Rapat No.024 dated 10.11.2018.

2.

The FIR was registered at the instance of Sukhjit Kaur @ Rani, wherein it has been alleged that on 19.8.2018, the petitioner entered her house and Pankaj Kakkar 2019.09.04 16:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

( 2 ) CRM-M-4111-2019 (O&M) started hurling filthy abuses and also caught hold of her from hair and dragged her due to which her clothes got torn and she also sustained injuries on her right foot.

3.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the FIR came to be lodged due to some misunderstanding and that the matter has now been compromised. The learned counsel, in this context, has referred to the compromise deed placed on record today as Annexure P-3, which is stated to be signed by the complainant apart from other witnesses. 4.

Although, the learned State counsel has feigned ignorance about the compromise but has informed that the petitioner has since joined investigation.

5.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and while noticing that the petitioner is stated to have compromised the matter with the complainant and has joined investigation, custodial interrogation is not warranted. The petition is accepted and the interim directions issued by this Court vide order dated 29.1.2019 are hereby made absolute subject to the condition that the petitioner shall join investigation as and when called upon to do so and cooperate with the Investigating Officer and shall also abide by the conditions as provided under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C. 4.9.2019 (Gurvinder Singh Gill) pankaj Judge Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No Pankaj Kakkar 2019.09.04 16:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document