Kulbeer Singh v. State Of Punjab

[ 1 ]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : November 08, 2017 Kulbeer Singh .................................................................Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ............................................................ Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL ...

Present:

Mr. Ashish Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Saurav Khurana, DAG, Punjab.

Mr. Padamkant Dwivedi, Advocate for the complainant.

...

LISA GILL, J. (Oral) The petitioner seeks the concession of anticipatory bail in FIR No. 34 dated 17.04.2017 under Sections 376, 506 IPC registered at Police Station Valtoha, District Tarn Taran.

Contentions on behalf of the petitoner noted while issuing notice of motion read as under:- "It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Reference is made to CRM No.M-19496 of 2017 (Annexure P3) moved by the alleged victim in this case against her own husband and other family members. The victim has taken a stand that she was pressurized into suffering a statement against the petitioner."

The petitioner, it is submitted, has since joined investigation. Therefore, this petition be allowed.

[ 2 ] Learned counsel for the complainant re-affirms the averments as above.

Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from SI Joginder Singh, Police Station Valtoha, District Tarn Taran, verifies that the complainant in this case has indeed suffered a statement before the police authorities on 14.10.2017 to the effect that she was pressurized into making a statement against the petitioner at the instance of her husband and his family. It is further verified that the petitioner has joined investigation pursuant to interim orders passed by this Court and his custodial interrogation is not required. It is also verified that the petitioner is not reported to be involved in any other criminal case except the present and another FIR No. 62 dated 14.05.2017 under Sections 364, 365, 34 IPC registered at the instance of the complainant's husband. There is no allegation that the petitioner is likely to abscond or that he is likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts before the learned trial Court, if released on bail.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, it is considered just and expedient to allow this petition. Consequently, order dated 08.09.2017 is made absolute.

None of the observations made here-in-above shall be construed to be a reflection on merits of the case and shall have no bearing on trial.

( LISA GILL ) 08.11.2017 JUDGE rupi Note: Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable:

Yes / No

[ 3 ]