High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/29318/2015allowed

Amritpal Singh @ Sunny v. State Of Punjab

2015-09-15Mr. Justice Harinder Singh Sidhu2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRM No.M-29318 of 2015 Date of Decision: September 15, 2015 Amritpal Singh @ Sunny

...Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

Present:

Mr.B.S.Baath, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms.Priyanka Sadar, Asstt. Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.

Mr.Satnam Singh Gill, Advocate for the complainant.

**** INDERJIT SINGH, J.

Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.41 dated 29.05.2014 under Sections 307/34 IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, registered at Police Station Dera Baba Nanak, Police District Batala. Notice of motion was issued and learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for the complainant appeared and contested the petition.

At the time of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner argued that a compromise has already been effected between the parties and a petition has been filed for quashing of the FIR on the VINEET GULATI 2015.09.16 16:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CRM No.M-29318 of 2015 -2basis of the compromise, which is fixed for 15.10.2015 in this Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner further argued that the statements of the parties have already been recorded regarding the compromise before the trial Court as per the directions of this Court. Learned counsel for the complainant admitted the factum of compromise and that quashing petition has already been filed and statements have already been recorded before the trial Court. Learned counsel for the complainant contended that complainant has no objection if the anticipatory bail is granted to the present petitioner. I have heard learned counsel for the parties as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record.

Keeping in view the facts of the present case and in view of the compromise between the parties and also the fact that petition has already been filed for quashing of the FIR on the basis of the compromise, I find merit in the present petition and the same is accepted. It is directed that in the event of arrest, the petitioner be released on anticipatory 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.

September 15, 2015 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE VINEET GULATI 2015.09.16 16:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh