High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/18965/2021allowed

Karan Singh Alias Karan Kumar v. State Of Punjab

2021-08-12Mr. Justice Raj Mohan Singh2 pages

CRM-M-18965-2021

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.18965 of 2021 Date of Decision:12.08.2021 KARAN SINGH ALIAS KARAN KUMAR ......Petitioner Vs STATE OF PUNJAB .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJ MOHAN SINGH Present:Mr. Sanchit Punia, Advocate for Mr. Neeraj Madan, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Harpreet S. Multani, Asstt. AG Punjab.

**** RAJ MOHAN SINGH, J. (Oral) The case has been taken up for hearing through video conferencing.

Petitioner seeks grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C in case bearing FIR No.20 dated 28.02.2021 dated 28.02.2021 registered under Sections 457 and 380 IPC, at Police Station Guruharsahai, District Ferozepur. Photocopy of status report is taken on record. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the registration of FIR was delayed by more than one month. As per allegations, the complainant himself made some enquires before the registration of FIR against the petitioner and co-accused Buta Singh and Sukhdev Singh @ Sukha. Buta Singh and Sukhdev Singh @ Sukha were arrested and part recoveries were effected from them. The bail was declined to the petitioner by the Court of Sessions on the premise that some recoveries are yet to be PRINCE SAINI 2021.08.12 17:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-18965-2021 effected from him.

Notice of motion was issued on 13.05.2021 on the premise that no disclosure statement of any of the co-accused was recorded after their arrest. In respect of complicity of the petitioner the recoveries had already been effected from them. Learned State counsel on instructions from ASI Baljinder Singh submits that the petitioner has joined the investigation on 26.05.2021 and his custody is no more required for effecting any recoveries.

Perusal of the status report would show that there are some recoveries to be effected from the petitioner but as per oral instructions from the IO, learned State counsel submits that custody of the petitioner is not required for any further purposes as the articles have been reconciled.

In view of stand taken by the State, the interim order dated 17.05.2021 is made absolute. Petitioner shall keep on joining the investigation as and when required to do so and he shall abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

Petition stands disposed of.

(RAJ MOHAN SINGH) 12.08.2021 JUDGE Amandeep Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No PRINCE SAINI 2021.08.12 17:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document