Nachattar Singh v. State Of Punjab

CRM-M-15223-2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-15223-2015 Date of Decision: August 21, 2015 Nachhattar Singh

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI

Present:

Mr. Sant Pal Singh Sidhu, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. K.S. Pannu, DAG, Punjab, for the respondent.

Mr. Dheeraj Mahajan, Advocate, for the informant.

1.

Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2.

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

3.

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

NARESH KUMAR SANGHI, J (Oral) Prayer in this petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, Nachhattar Singh, son of Puran Singh, resident of Vakilawala, Tehsil Zira, District Ferozepur, who has been booked for having committed the offences punishable under Sections 316, 406, 498-A and 506, IPC, in a case arising out of FIR No. 10, dated 5.3.2015, registered at Police Station, Ghanie Ke Bangar, Police District Batala, District Gurdaspur.

Learned counsel contends that the petitioner is a distinct relation of mother-in-law of the informant; in compliance of the interim directions issued by this Court vide order dated PRASHANT KAPOOR 2015.08.21 14:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

CRM-M-15223-2015 14.5.2015, the petitioner did join the investigation and his custodial interrogation is not required; the husband and mother-in-law of the informant were arrested and released on bail; and that during pendency of the present petition, better sense has prevailed and parties to the lis have sorted out their matrimonial dispute and effected a compromise.

Learned counsel for the State on instructions from ASI Rachhpal Singh of Police Station, Ghanie Ke Bangar, Police District Batala, District Gurdaspur, concedes that the petitioner has joined the investigation and his custodial interrogation is not required. He further submits that as per his information the parties to the lis have sorted out their dispute.

Learned counsel for the informant has also admitted the factum of compromise.

In view of above, the present petition is allowed. The interim directions issued by this Court vide order dated 14.5.2015 are made absolute. The petitioner shall continue to join the investigation as and when required to do so and abide by all the conditions laid down under Section 438(2), Cr.P.C. (NARESH KUMAR SANGHI) JUDGE August 21, 2015 Pkapoor PRASHANT KAPOOR 2015.08.21 14:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document