Balwinder Kaur v. State Of Punjab

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 1.

Criminal Misc. No.M- 19011 of 2017(O&M) Date of Decision: December 21 , 2017.

Balwinder Kaur ...... PETITIONER(s)

Versus

State of Punjab ...... RESPONDENT (s) 2.

Criminal Misc. No. M- 20234 of 2017(O&M).

Amritpal Singh ...... PETITIONER(s)

Versus

State of Punjab ...... RESPONDENT (s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE LISA GILL

Present:

Mr. Sandeep Arora, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Rahul Rathore, DAG, Punjab.

Mr. Gurpreet Singh, Advocate for Mr. Binat Sharma, Advocate for the complainant.

*****

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? ***** LISA GILL, J.

This order shall dispose of CRM No.M-19011 of 2017 (Balwinder

-2Kaur v. State of Punjab) and CRM No.M-20234 of 2017 (Amritpal Singh v. State of Punjab). Facts for the sake of convenience are being taken from CRM No.M-19011 of 2017.

Prayer in both these petitions is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in FIR No.45 dated 24.03.2017 under Sections 323/341/506/379B/ 354/34 IPC, registered at Police Station Division No.5, Jalandhar. It is submitted that the aforementioned FIR is, in fact, an outcome of a dispute regarding a shop taken on rent by the husband of the petitioner - Balwinder Kaur from the complainant in the year 2012. It is informed that the matter has been amicably resolved between the parties. Moreover, the petitioners have joined investigation pursuant to interim orders dated 25.05.2017 and 01.06.2017 passed by this Court. It is therefore, prayed that this petition be allowed.

Learned counsel for the complainant affirms and verifies that the matter has been amicably resolved between the parties and the complainant has no objection in case both these petitions are allowed. Learned counsel for the State submits that the petitioners have joined investigation. Their custodial interrogation is not required. No recovery is to be effected from them. The petitioners, it is verified, are not involved in any other criminal case. There are no allegations on behalf of the State that the petitioners are likely to abscond.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances as above but without commenting upon or expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, these petitions are allowed. Consequently, order dated 25.05.2017 in CRM No.M-

-319011 of 2017 and order dated 01.06.2017 in CRM No.M-20234 of 2017 are made absolute.

It is clarified that none of the observations made hereinabove shall be construed to be a reflection on the merits of the case. The same are solely confined for the purpose of decision of the present petition. ( LISA GILL ) December 21 , 2017.

JUDGE 'om'

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No