Sunil Kumar v. State Of Punjab And ANR

 

 

  

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH   


 

Date of Decision : May 30, 2024 

 

   ! "#



!$

% &

'



 !'  
  



 

   ! "#



!$

% &

'



 !'  
(( 



 

   ! "#



!$

% &

'



 !' 

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI

Present:

Mr. K.B. Raheja, Advocate for the petitioner(s)
Mr. Pardeep Bajaj, D.A.G., Punjab
Mr. Bipan Ghai, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Nikhil Ghai, Advocate for the respondent No.2 (in

.

*** KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (ORAL) 1.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, challenge to the orders granting bail/anticipatory bail to the respondent No.2 (in all these petitions), is based on the fact that, the learned trial Court has erroneously relied upon the interim protection given by this Court in the anticipatory bail petition of co-accused Neelam Kumari @ Neelam Godara, whereas, the learned trial Court ought to have awaited the outcome of the anticipatory DEVINDER YADAV 2024.05.31 09:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

 

 

   bail petition of the co-accused (supra).

2.

However, since this Court has, vide order of even date, drawn upon "CRM-M-62311-2023", titled as "NEELAM KUMARI @ NEELAM GODARA V/S STATE OF PUNJAB", confirmed the interim bail granted to the co-accused Neelam Kumari, therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, when the respondent No.2 (in all these petitions) are admittedly on a co-equal pedestal as co-accused Neelam Kumari, therefore, there remains no other argument.

3.

The instant petition are accordingly dismissed. 4.

        

  
(KULDEEP TIWARI) May 30, 2024 JUDGE devinder Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether Reportable :

Yes/No DEVINDER YADAV 2024.05.31 09:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment