Paramjeet Kaur v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH (i) CRM No.M-23345 of 2017 (O&M) Paramjeet Kaur

...Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Punjab

...Respondent

(ii) CRM No.M-24309 of 2017 (O&M) Teja Singh

...Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Punjab

...Respondent

Date of Decision: August 09, 2017

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

Present:

Mr.Satbir Gill, Advocate for the petitioners.

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

Mr.J.S.Mundi, Advocate for the complainant.

**** INDERJIT SINGH, J.

Both the above-mentioned cases are taken up together as the same have arisen from same FIR.

Petitioners have filed these petitions under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Vineet Gulati 2017.08.10 16:17 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.45 dated 07.06.2017 under

CRM No.M-23345 of 2017 and connected petition -2Sections 364, 341, 323, 148, 149 and 506 IPC (Section 325 IPC added later on), registered at Police Station Sadar Sunam, District Sangrur. Notice of motion was issued. Learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for the complainant appeared and contested the petition. I have heard learned counsel for the parties as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record. As per prosecution version, qua Paramjeet Kaur, only lalkara has been attributed and as regarding petitioner Teja Singh, there is no allegation regarding abduction etc. Only attribution to him is that he has given iron rod blow on the forehead of the complainant, which injury has been declared as simple.

The petitioners have already joined the investigation. They are not required for custodial interrogation. No useful purpose will be served by sending them to custody.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and without discussing the facts of the case in minute details and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case, where petitioners are entitled to benefit of grant of anticipatory bail. Therefore, both the petitions are accepted and the order dated 05.07.2017 passed in CRM No.M-23345 of 2017 and order dated 27.07.2017 passed in CRM No.M-24309 of 2017, granting interim bail to the petitioners, are made absolute.

August 09, 2017 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No Vineet Gulati 2017.08.10 16:17 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh