Tarsem Raj v. State Of Punjab

{1}

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM No.23576 of 2021 in/and 102+209 CRM-M-20761 of 2021 Date of decision:05.08.2021 Tarsem Raj ... Petitioner Vs.

State of Punjab ... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL Present:- Mr. Munish Puri, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Sandeep Singh Deol, DAG, Punjab.

SUVIR SEHGAL, J. (Oral) The Court has been convened through video conferencing due to Covid-19 pandemic.

CRM No.23576 of 2021 Prayer in the application is for placing on record the receipts of deposit as Annexure P-9.

Application is allowed. Receipts are taken on record as Annexure P-9.

CRM-M-20761 of 2021 Through the instant petition, the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No.83 dated 07.05.2021 registered under Sections 420, 120-B of Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Sujanpur, District Pathankot.

{2} On 25.05.2021, following order was passed:- "Inter alia contends that petitioner is ready to deposit the entire amount of penalty before the Authorities concerned within two weeks from today subject to final outcome of the criminal case.

Notice of motion.

On the asking of the Court, Mr. V.G.Jauhar, Sr. DAG, Punjab, who is present through Video-Conference, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent.

Let the amount of penalty be assessed so that necessary steps be taken by the petitioner before the date fixed. Posted on 05.08.2021.

In the meanwhile, petitioner will join the investigation before the Investigating Officer. In the event of his arrest, the Arresting Officer would admit him to interim bail in the present case till the next date of hearing on his furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds to his satisfaction. The petitioner is also directed to abide by all the conditions as envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C."

Counsel for the petitioner has referred to the receipts (Annexure P-9) to submit that the petitioner has not only deposited the market fee but also compounding fee as demanded by the Market Committee.

{3} Learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Surinder Kumar submits that petitioner has joined investigation and is no longer required for custodial interrogation. He has further instructions to state that petitioner is not involved in any other criminal case. In view of the above facts, but without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the order dated 25.05.2021 granting interim bail to the petitioner is made absolute, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(SUVIR SEHGAL) JUDGE August 05, 2021 savita Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No