Master Trust Limited v. State Of Punjab & ANR

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ......

Criminal Misc. No.M-39047 of 2017 .....

Date of decision:23.10.2017 Master Trust Limited

...Petitioner

v.

State of Punjab and another

...Respondents

....

Coram:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh .....

Present:

Mr. Iqbal Singh Ratta, Advocate for the petitioner. .....

Inderjit Singh, J.

This petition has been filed under Section 439(2) Cr.P.C. read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. for cancellation of pre-arrest bail having been granted to respondent No.2 vide order dated 7.8.2017 (Annexure-P.11) passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, whereby anticipatory bail application dated 8.6.2017 (Annexure-P.8) filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. by respondent No.2 Pritpal Singh has been allowed. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the record.

From the record I find that the learned Additional Sessions Judge while exercising his judicial discretion granted the anticipatory bail to respondent No.2-Pritpal Singh. I have perused the order dated 7.8.2017 (Annexure-P.11) passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana. The anticipatory bail has been granted correctly in the facts and circumstances of the present case. In no way, any illegality has been Harpal Singh Parmar 2017.10.24 17:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Cr. Misc. No.M-39047 of 2017 committed nor there is any ground as to why the anticipatory bail should not be granted to the private respondent No.2-Pritpal Singh. Nothing has been argued after the grant of the anticipatory bail that the respondent No.2 tampered with the evidence or has misused the concession of the bail. A perusal of the record shows that the dispute between the parties is mainly regarding the default in returning the loan amount and the cheque given by the respondent No.2-accused to the present petitionercomplainant has been dishonoured qua which separate proceedings have been initiated.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, I do not find any ground to cancel the benefit of anticipatory bail granted to respondent No.2.

Therefore, finding no merit in this petition, the same is dismissed.

October 23, 2017.

(Inderjit Singh) Judge *hsp* NOTE:

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes Whether reportable:

No Harpal Singh Parmar 2017.10.24 17:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh