Harbhajan Singh v. Jagjit Singh And Others

Crl. Misc. No. M-6779 of 2018 -1In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Crl. Misc. No. M-6779 of 2018 Date of Decision: 18.7.2018 Harbhajan Singh ......Petitioner

Versus

Jagjit Singh and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANITA CHAUDHRY

Present:

Mr. P.S.Jammu, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. J.S.Toor, APP, U.T., Chandigarh.

**** ANITA CHAUDHRY, J The petitioner is seeking cancellation of bail allowed to respondents No. 1 and 2 in FIR No. 0057 dated 9.6.2017 registered at Police Station Women Cell, Sector-17, Chandigarh under Sections 406, 498-A IPC.

Counsel for the petitioner contends that after bail was allowed, an envelope containing threat was found inside the gate early in the morning at 6.30 A.M. on 19.1.2018 but it is a anonymous letter. Counsel further states that the son of respondents No. 1 and 2 is a proclaimed offender and is abroad.

Counsel for the petitioner was asked as to whether there was any postal stamp. Counsel states that there was no postal stamp and no one had seen anyone placing the envelope inside the gate as it was left in the early hour.

Gurpreet Singh Bhatia 2018.07.20 16:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh

Crl. Misc. No. M-6779 of 2018 -2Respondents No. 1 and 2 who are the in-laws were allowed bail in December 2017. Counsel for the petitioner had referred to para 5 of the order and also urges that respondents No. 1 and 2 had offered to give cash in lieu of gold and gold had not been recovered, therefore bail should be cancelled.

A perusal of the order shows that though an offer was made but the Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh did not pass conditional order. The FIR was registered in 2017. It appears that the son was already abroad. The complainant's daughter had also gone to Canada with her husband just five days after the marriage. Respondents No. 1 and 2 are residents of Amritsar whereas the complainant is a resident of Chandigarh. No one had seen the respondents (who are aged) coming to Chandigarh and placing the envelope inside the gate of the complainant. The letter (Annexure P-4) is typed. Cancellation of bail is serious business. The petitioner has not placed any material to show that the letter was placed by respondents No. 1 and 2. No ground for cancellation of bail is made out. The petition is dismissed.

(ANITA CHAUDHRY) JUDGE July 18, 2018 Gurpreet Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes Whether reportable :

No Gurpreet Singh Bhatia 2018.07.20 16:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh