← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/36178/2018allowed

Simranjeet Kaur v. State Of Punjab

2018-10-23Mr. Justice Arvind Singh Sangwan2 pages

CRM-M No.36178 of 2018 (O&M)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.36178 of 2018 (O&M) Decided on: 23.10.2018 Simranjeet Kaur ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN Present :

Mr. G.S. Bhatia, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Sidakmeet Singh Sandhu, AAG, Punjab.

ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, J. (Oral) The petitioner prays for grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No.93 dated 28.02.2018, registered under Sections 420, 406 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short 'IPC') at Police Station Civil Lines, District Amritsar.

The operative part of the order dated 27.08.2018, vide which interim anticipatory bail has been granted to the petitioner, is reproduced as under:- "....Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the allegations in the FIR, the complainant was doing business with three persons, namely Parveen @ Pappu, Mukesh Kumar and Rakesh Kumar, and even on earlier occasion, he was doing business with them. It is further alleged in the FIR that on 04.02.2018, the complainant handed over diamonds, worth more than Rs.29 Lakh, to Parveen and he had taken the diamonds out of his shop for checking the same and thereafter, the other MOHD YAKUB 2018.10.23 16:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh

CRM-M No.36178 of 2018 (O&M) two co-accused also went outside the shop for collecting money, however, all the said three persons did not return back. It is also submitted that the FIR in question was registered on 28.02.2018 i.e. after 24 days of the incident. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is a young lady, aged 20 years, and she is not named in the FIR and the only allegation against her is that she had stayed with one of the co-accused, namely Parveen, in a hotel on the date of incident. Learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Jaskaran Singh, has not disputed that the petitioner has not been named in the FIR.

List again on 23.10.2018...."

Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that, in pursuance to the order dated 27.08.2018, the petitioner has appeared before the Investigating Officer and has joined the investigation. Counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Jaskaran Singh, has not disputed the aforesaid fact and submits that the petitioner is no more required for further investigation. In view of the above, this petition is allowed and the interim bail granted to the petitioner vide order dated 27.08.2018 is made absolute subject to the conditions envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

(ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN) JUDGE 23.10.2018 yakub Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No MOHD YAKUB 2018.10.23 16:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh