Sandip Singh And ANR v. State Of Punjab

Crl. Misc. No. M-31395 of 2018 -1In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Crl. Misc. No. M-31395 of 2018 Date of Decision: 06.8.2018 Sandip Singh and another ......Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and another .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANITA CHAUDHRY

Present:

Mr. Surinder Thakur, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Jagmohan Ghumman, DAG, Punjab.

Ms. Satpreet Grewal Kapila, Advocate for respondent No. 2.

**** ANITA CHAUDHRY, J Through the instant petition, the petitioner is seeking anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 87 dated 20.6.2018, registered under Sections 494, 177, 420 IPC, Police Station Mukerian, District Hoshiarpur. Notice of the petition was given to respondent No. 2. On the last date of hearing, counsel for the petitioners had stated the he was ready for any settlement and the complainant may be impleaded as a party so that they can ask for mediation and one time settlement.

Respondent No. 2 has appeared and states that there are no chances of any settlement as petitioner No. 1 was married in 2016 and the very next year he has married petitioner No. 2 and has forged documents and petitioner No. 2 is already married whose husband is residing abroad. It GURPREET SINGH 2018.08.09 14:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh

Crl. Misc. No. M-31395 of 2018 -2was contended that the girl was already married and they applied for registration of the second marriage knowing fully well that both of them were married and all the documents and the marriage certificate were enclosed with their complaint and the petitioners are not entitled to anticipatory bail.

The allegations against the petitioners are that during the subsistence of the marriage with the complainant, petitioner No. 1 married petitioner No. 2 who was already married and her husband was abroad. Both the petitioners approached the Registrar of Marriages and got their marriage registered and forgery has been practised not only on the respective spouses but the Registrar of Marriages. The allegations against the petitioners are that they gave false information for issuance of passport. The allegations are grave. Custodial interrogation of the petitioners would be necessary. No case for anticipatory bail is made out. The petition is dismissed.

(ANITA CHAUDHRY) JUDGE August 06, 2018 Gurpreet Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes Whether reportable :

No GURPREET SINGH 2018.08.09 14:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh