Lakhwinder Singh v. State Of Punjab

Crl. Misc. No. M-45577 of 2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Sr. No. 207 Case No. : Crl. Misc. No. M-45577 of 2016 Date of Decision : March 07, 2017 Lakhwinder Singh ....

Petitioner vs.

State of Punjab ....

Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL.

* * * Present :

Mr. B. D. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Neeraj Yadav, AAG, Punjab.

* * * DEEPAK SIBAL , J.

:

Through this petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the petitioner seeks the grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No.89 dated 15.10.2016, registered under Sections 323, 326, 148, 149 IPC, at Police Station Kathunangal, District Amritsar.

While issuing notice of motion on 10.01.2017, this Court had granted ad-interim anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to his joining investigation and conditions envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter between the petitioner and the complainant has been compromised. A photocopy of such compromise has been produced in Court, which is ordered to be taken on record as Mark-A. Copy of the same has been handed over to learned State counsel.

Monika 2017.03.07 18:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Crl. Misc. No. M-45577 of 2016 Seeking anticipatory bail for the petitioner, learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that even if the allegations in the FIR are taken as gospel truth, the grievous injury, which is attributed to the petitioner, is on a non-vital part of the body of Jagwinder Singh; the petitioner has no other criminal case pending against him; in view of the interim order granted by this Court, the petitioner has joined investigation and is no longer required for further questioning by the investigating agency and that the matter has been compromised between the parties. Learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Rashpal Singh, submits that the petitioner has joined investigation and is no longer required for further questioning by the investigating agency. He further admits that the matter between the petitioner and the complainant has been compromised.

In view of the above, the petition is allowed and order dated 10.01.2017 granting ad-interim anticipatory bail to the petitioner is made absolute, subject to the conditions prescribed under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. Nothing observed herein above shall be considered to be an expression of opinion by this Court on the merits of the case. If the petitioner is found indulging in any other criminal act or misusing the concession of bail granted by this Court, it would be open to the State to seek cancellation of bail granted through this order by filing an appropriate application before the competent Court/this Court. ( DEEPAK SIBAL ) JUDGE March 07, 2017 monika Whether speaking/reasoned ?

Yes/No.

Whether reportable ?

Yes/No.

Monika 2017.03.07 18:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document