Sukhdev Singh v. State Of Punjab And ANR

CRM No.M-5224 of 2017 [1]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No.M- 5224 of 2017(O&M) Date of Decision: May 17 , 2017.

Sukhdev Singh ...... PETITIONER (s)

Versus

State of Punjab and another ...... RESPONDENT (s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE LISA GILL

Present:

Mr. Karanjit Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Rajpreet Singh Sidhu, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. Sumeet Puri, Advocate for the complainant/respondent No.2.

*****

1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2. To be referred to the reporters or not?

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest? ***** LISA GILL, J.

Petitioner is the father-in-law of the complainant. He seeks the concession of anticipatory bail in FIR No.5 dated 12.01.2017 under Sections 406/498A IPC registered at Police Station Tanda, District Hoshiarpur. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during the pendency of this petition, the matter has been amicably resolved between the parties. The complainant and the petitioner's son are now residing together in their matrimonial home. The petitioner has joined investigation. Therefore, this petition be allowed.

Omkar Singh 2017.05.18 17:45 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CRM No.M-5224 of 2017 [2] Mr. Sumeet Puri, Advocate appears on behalf of respondent No.2 and files his power of attorney. The same is taken on record subject to just exceptions. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 affirms the factual position as above.

Respondent No.2, duly identified by her counsel, is present in Court. She states that she is living in her matrimonial home alongwith her husband and has no objection in case this petition is allowed. Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Satnam Singh, submits that the petitioner has joined investigation and he is not required for custodial interrogation.

There are no allegations on behalf of the State that the petitioner is likely to abscond or that he is likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts in the Court, if released on bail. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances as above specifically the settlement arrived at between the parties, but without commenting upon or expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this petition is allowed. Consequently, order dated 20.02.2017 is made absolute. ( LISA GILL ) May 17 , 2017.

JUDGE 'om'

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No Omkar Singh 2017.05.18 17:45 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh