← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/19454/2024allowed

Vinit Gupta v. State Of Punjab

2025-03-07Mrs. Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-19454-2024 Date of decision: March 7th, 2025 Vinit Gupta .....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab .....Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present:

Mr. Amit Dhawan, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Shiva Khurmi, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. Nakul Sharma, Advocate for Mr. M.S. Sachdev, Advocate for the complainant.

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL) Petitioner is seeking the concession of anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in FIR No.216 dated 21.10.2023 under Sections 419, 420, 511, 465, 467, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered at Police Station Division No.6, Police Commissionerate Jalandhar.

2.

While issuing notice of motion on 22.04.2024, following submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner were recorded:- "Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that admittedly the dispute is inter se the brothers; he submits that admittedly there are some other cases also pending between the parties. He submits that the petitioner is willing to sit with his brother and iron out the differences. It has been prayed that the matter be referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court for arriving at an amicable settlement."

PUNEET SACHDEVA 2025.03.07 14:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M-19454-2024 -23.

Thereafter, vide order dated 22.11.2024, the petitioner had been granted interim anticipatory bail with direction to join investigation. 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of order dated 22.11.2024, the petitioner has joined investigation and cooperated with the investigating agency. 5.

Learned State counsel, on instructions from S.I. Bhushan Kumar, does not dispute the factum of the petitioner having joined investigation and cooperated with the investigating agency. He, on further instructions, submits that the petitioner is not required for further investigation much less for his custodial interrogation. 6.

In view of the above, the petition is allowed and interim order dated 22.11.2024, is made absolute subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C./482(2) BNSS.

March 7th, 2025 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Puneet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No PUNEET SACHDEVA 2025.03.07 14:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh