Kahan Singh v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM No.M-12808 of 2017 (O&M) Date of Decision: July 05, 2017 Kahan Singh

...Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

Present:

Mr.Kawaljyot Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr.Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, Sr. DAG, Punjab for the respondent-State.

**** INDERJIT SINGH, J.

Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.14 dated 09.03.2017 under Sections 323, 324, 365 and 34 IPC, registered at Police Station Bilga, District Jalandhar Rural.

Notice of motion was issued. Learned State counsel appeared and contested the petition.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record. From the record, I find that FIR has been got registered by Sukhwinder Singh, who stated that he met Kahan Singh, who had a conversation with him and told that he wanted to go abroad. The Vineet Gulati 2017.07.06 15:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CRM No.M-12808 of 2017 -2complainant introduced Kahan Singh to a lady, whose name is Rani in Cyprus (abroad). Kahan Singh told that three persons are to be sent to abroad and deal was settled at `12 lakhs and the money was to be given through the complainant. Above-said Rani sent fake VISA after some time. As per the complainant, he sold his house for `16 lakhs to three persons and also gave `2,82,000/- to Kahan Singh on different dates. On 08.03.2017, the complainant along with son boarded the bus and one Bhaiya Sunil and Kahan Singh also boarded the bus and they took the complainant and his son forcibly on motorcycle and gave injuries to the complainant. It is also in the FIR that complainant called the police on no. 100 when he was in the custody of accused persons and police reached at the spot and on seeing the police, the accused ran away.

As per learned State counsel, one injury on little finger has also been declared grievous in this case. The complainant has suffered 11 injuries on his person.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, nature and gravity of the offence, without discussing the facts in minute detail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find that the petitioner is required for custodial interrogation. Therefore, finding no merit in the present petition, the same is dismissed.

July 05, 2017 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No Vineet Gulati 2017.07.06 15:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh