High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/19849/2017disposed of

Sandeep Kumar @ Sandy v. The State Of Punjab And Another

2017-11-03Mr. Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-19849-2017 (O&M) Date of decision: 03.11.2017 Sandeep Kumar @ Sandy

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and another

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR

Present:

Mr. Charanpreet Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Davinder Bir Singh, DAG, Punjab.

**** JAISHREE THAKUR, J. (ORAL) This is a petition for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.68 dated 23.06.2015 under Sections 376, 420, 506 & 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Balongi, District SAS Nagar, Mohali. This Court was pleased to pass the following order on 04.07.2017 :- "It is contended by the counsel for the petitioner that the complainant is in the habit of making false complaints of a similar nature against the petitioner. In fact, an enquiry was conducted by the DSP, Sub Division, Nawan Shahr, in which a categoric finding was returned that "Manpreet Kaur is found to be a character of fraudulent nature". Counsel for the petitioner asserts that after having left Balongi, where she was residing, she has shifted to Jalandhar where again, an FIR under similar sections has been registered at her behest. Counsel for the petitioner submits that no recoveries are to be made from the petitioner.

Notice of motion for 03.11.2017.

Satyawan 2017.11.03 16:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh

CRM-M-19849-2017 -2Meanwhile, in the event of arrest, the petitioner be released on interim bail subject to his furnishing personal bonds and surety to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. However, the petitioner shall join the investigation as and when called upon to do so and shall abide by the conditions as provided under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

Counsel for the petitioner is directed to place on record the copy of the FIR registered at Jalandhar at the behest of the complainant."

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has joined the investigation and he is not required for investigation any further.

Learned counsel for the respondent-State confirms the aforesaid fact.

Since the petitioner has joined the investigation, the petition is allowed and interim order dated 04.07.2017 is hereby made absolute subject to the condition that the petitioner will not tamper with evidence or hamper the investigation; will not leave India without permission of the Court and will comply with the conditions contained in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. 03.11.2017 (JAISHREE THAKUR) Satyawan JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes.

Whether reportable No.

Satyawan 2017.11.03 16:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh