Lachman Singh v. State

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

Criminal Writ Petition No.959 of 2016 .....

Date of decision:2.9.2016 Lachhman Singh

...Petitioner

v.

State of Punjab

...Respondent

....

Coram:

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

Present:

None for the petitioner.

Mr. Varun Sharma, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.

.....

Inderjit Singh, J.

The application sent by applicant-Lachhman Singh for the release of his son Satnam Singh from the custody of Police to the Hon'ble Chief Justice had been treated as criminal writ petition and was taken up on judicial side.

Notice of motion has been issued in this case. Mr. Varun Sharma, learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent-State and contested this criminal writ petition.

I have heard learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab appearing for the respondent-State and have gone through the record. Learned State counsel has filed short reply by way of affidavit Harpal Singh Parmar 2016.09.08 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Cr. W.P. No.959 of 2016 [2] of Mr. Jaswant Singh Gill, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub Division, Jaito, District Faridkot on behalf of the State. In the reply, it has been stated that FIR No.45 dated 18.5.2016 was registered for the offences under Sections 307, 394, 397 and 120-B IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act at Police Station Jaito against unknown persons. Satnam Singh son of Lachhman Singh and Satnam Singh son of Teja Singh have been nominated as accused on the statement of Harjinder Singh and were arrested on 14.6.2016. During their interrogation, accused Jugraj Singh alias Jagga, Lovepreet Singh etc. were also nominated. During Police remand accused Satnam Singh son of Lachhman Singh got recovered mobile make Samsung. Learned State counsel has stated that Jugraj Singh is in judicial custody. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, I find that no further action is required in this petition and the same is disposed of accordingly.

September 2, 2016.

(Inderjit Singh) Judge *hsp* NOTE:

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes Whether reportable:

No Harpal Singh Parmar 2016.09.08 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh