← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/8817/2019allowed

Jasvir Kaur v. State Of Punjab

2019-12-03Mr. Justice Surinder Gupta3 pages

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH.

(1) Crl. Misc. No.M-8817 of 2019 (O&M) Date of Decision: December 03, 2019 Jasvir Kaur ......PETITIONER(s).

VERSUS

State of Punjab ....RESPONDENT(s).

(2) Crl. Misc. No.M-21847 of 2019 (O&M) Dharamjit Singh @ Dharamjeet Singh ......PETITIONER(s).

VERSUS

State of Punjab ....RESPONDENT(s).

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA

Present:

Mr. SPS Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner (s).

Mr. Rakeshinder Singh Sidhu, A.A.G. Punjab.

Mr. B.S. Bhalla, Advocate for the complainant.

******* SURINDER GUPTA, J.(Oral) Both the aforementioned petitions have been filed under Section 438 Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in case FIR No.2 dated 02.02.2019 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 120B of Indian Penal Code, at Police Station NRI Moga, District Moga.

Heard.

Petition (CRM-M-21847-2019) was filed by Dharamjit Singh

-2- @ Dharamjeet Singh. Vide order dated 02.08.2018, complainant was allowed to be impleaded as respondent No.2 on the application of petitioner (CRM-23174-2019), however, in the amended memo of parties, one Rashpal Singh son of Dharamjit Singh has been impleaded as petitioner No.2 without any order or permission in this regard. His name be deleted from the amended memo of parties in CRM-M-21847-2019. Rashpal, petitioner No.2 will be at liberty to avail separate legal remedy available to him.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the matter has been amicably settled and the dispute regarding payment of money has been resolved.

Learned counsel appearing for the complainant endorses the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners. Learned State counsel on instructions from ASI Nachhattar Singh submits that petitioners Jasvir Kaur and Dharamjit Singh @ Dharamjeet Singh have joined the investigation, which is still in progress but the Investigating Officer is not having any information regarding the compromise between the parties.

Keeping in view the fact that matter is stated to have been settled between the parties, but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, both these petitions are allowed. Order dated 29.04.2019 passed in CRM-M-8817-2019 and 14.05.2019 passed in CRM-M-218472019 are made absolute till the presentation of challan, subject to the following terms:- (i) that the petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by the police as and when required;

-3- (ii) that the petitioners shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the accusation against them so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

(iii) that the petitioners shall not leave India without the prior permission of the Court;

(iv) that the petitioners will seek regular bail on presentation of challan in Court.

( SURINDER GUPTA ) December 03, 2019 JUDGE Sachin M.

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No