← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/19462/2024disposed of

Ravinder Gupta v. State Of Punjab

2024-07-16Mr. Justice Sandeep Moudgil2 pages

CRM-M No.19462 of 2024 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** CRM-M No.19462 of 2024 Date of decision : 16.7.2024 Ravinder Gupta .............Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL Present: Mr. Rahul Garg, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. J.S. Rattu, DAG, Punjab Mr. Abnash Singh, Advocate, for the complainant --- SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL)  

          

         

 

      !"# $

  %&'& 

  &'   !(%'          )* 

)   2.

Power of attorney filed on behalf of the complainant, is taken on record.

3.

This Court vide order dated 22.4.2024, while issuing notice of motion, granted the concession of interim bail to the petitioner, subject to his joining the investigation.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in pursuance to the order dated 22.4.2024, the petitioner has joined the investigation. 5.

Learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Kiran Singh, Ashwani Kumar 2024.07.17 16:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M No.19462 of 2024 -2does not controvert the said fact and further submits that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. 6.

Learned counsel for the complainant while opposing the prayer of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, argues that the modus operandi of the petitioner alongwith other groups who is looting poor farmers needs to be unearthed, wherein numerous complaints have been filed with the police authorities but only one case was registered by the police, who has not paying any heed to the other complaints/FIRs. 7.

Be that as it may, considering the aforesaid contention raised on behalf of the complainant, this Court does not find any reason to deny the concession of bail in this petition wherein the petitioner is appearing and already joined the investigation as has been categorically informed by the learned State counsel. Even otherwise, whatever the grievance qua the registration of FIRs in another complaints by the police authorities is concerned, the complainants have other remedies in law for redressal of the same by taken note of the instant petition while considering the anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

8.

In view of the above discussion, the order dated 22.4.2024 is made absolute.

9.

Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of. (SANDEEP MOUDGIL) JUDGE 16.7.2024 Ashwani Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No Ashwani Kumar 2024.07.17 16:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document