Pritpal Singh v. State Of Punjab & ANR.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM No.M-31224 of 2017 (O&M) Date of Decision: July 16, 2018 Pritpal Singh

...Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Punjab and another

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

Present:

Mr.Dharambir Bhargav, Advocate for Mr.Madan Sandhu, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms.Monika Jalota, DAG, Punjab for the respondent-State.

None for respondent No.2.

**** INDERJIT SINGH, J.

Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 439(2) Cr.P.C. for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to respondent No.2 on 05.04.2017 by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib, on the basis of statement dated 23.03.2017 given by the petitioner as per undertaking given by way of affidavit/compromise in case FIR No.93 dated 14.08.2016 under Sections 406, 420 and 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Sirhind, District Fatehgarh Sahib.

Notice of motion was issued. Learned State counsel appeared and contested the petition. On previous date, learned counsel for respondent No.2 appeared but today, none has appeared on behalf of respondent No.2. Vineet Gulati 2018.07.19 14:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CRM No.M-31224 of 2017 -2I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record. The perusal of the record shows that earlier a compromise was effected between the parties, copy of which, has already been placed on the record. As per the petitioner, statement was given on the basis of compromise. When the compromise has effected and the Court has passed the order on the basis of compromise, now, if there is any breach of term and condition of the compromise or anything, this is no ground for cancellation of bail given to Veena Sodhi. There is no allegation that she has threatened the complainant nor there is any allegation that she is tampering with the evidence or violating the terms and conditions of the bail order.

In view of the above discussion, no ground is made out for cancelling the bail granted to respondent No.2-Veena Sodhi. Therefore, finding no merit in the present petition, the same is dismissed.

July 16, 2018 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No Vineet Gulati 2018.07.19 14:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh