Daljit Singh v. State Of Punjab

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:17.05.2019 Daljit Singh @ Daljit Singh Basra

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ BAJAJ

Present:

Mr. Gaurav Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Harsimar Singh Sitta, AAG, Punjab.

*** MANOJ BAJAJ, J.(ORAL) This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 438 Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.101 dated 22.08.2018 under Sections 323/324/341/34 IPC and Section 326 IPC (which has been added later on), registered at Police Station Sadar, Kapurthala, District Kapurthala. The petitioner apprehended his arrest at the hands of Police.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has invited the attention of the Court to the order dated 05.12.2018 whereby while issuing notice of motion to the respondent-State, the interim protection was extended to the petitioner. The said order reads as under:- "Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the matter has been compromised between the parties and a petition for quashing of the FIR on the basis of compromise has also been filed.

-2Notice of motion was issued on 27.9.2018.

Let the petitioner join investigation on 17.12.2018 at 11.00 am and in the event of arrest, he shall be released on interim bail to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. He shall join the investigation as and when required by the Investigating Officer. He shall also comply with the conditions as envisaged under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which are as under:- (i)that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation before investigating officer as and when required;

(ii)that the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer;

(iii)that the petitioner shall not leave India without the prior permission of the Court."

Learned counsel for the petitioner further contends that in deference to the said order, the petitioner submitted himself before the Police and joined the investigation. According to him, the petitioner cooperated with the Police Authorities during the investigation and furnished requisite bonds to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer/Arresting Officer.

Learned State counsel who is assisted by HC Jaswinder does not dispute this fact that the petitioner has joined the investigation. He further states that the petitioner is not required for custodial interrogation for the time being.

Considering above, the petition is allowed and the interim bail

-3granted by this Court vide order dated 05.12.2018 is made absolute. However, it is made clear that this order shall remain operative till the filing of the final report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. The petition stands allowed.

17.05.2019 (MANOJ BAJAJ) sheetal JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No