Saddam Husshan v. State Of Punjab And Another

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 16.02.2023 Saddam Husshan ......... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and another ......... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL

Present:

Mr.K.S.Sodhi, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Amish Sharma, Asstt. A.G., Punjab.

Mr. Rajeev Kumar Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.2.

**** JAGMOHAN BANSAL , J. (Oral) On 22.08.2022, the following order was passed :- "Learned counsel for the petitioner interalia contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case; he is not involved in any other criminal matter, in any case, the dispute between the petitioner and the complainant already stands compromised on the basis whereof a petition being CRM-M-35663-2022-Saddam Husshan and another vs. State of Punjab and another seeking quashing of the instant FIR stands filed and that in view of the above custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary. Notice of motion.

Mr.Navneet Singh, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab and Mr.S.S.Dhaliwal, Advocate

-2accept notice on behalf of the respondent No.1State and the complainant-respondent No.2, respectively.

For arguments, adjourned to 29.11.2022 To be heard along with CRM-M-35663-2022.

In the meanwhile subject to the petitioner's joining investigation as and when called by the investigating agency as also abiding by the other conditions provided under Section 438(2) Cr.PC, in the event of his arrest in FIR No.84, dated 17.07.2022, registered under Sections 323, 324, 354, 34, 326 IPC at Police Station City Nakodar, District Jalandhar, he shall be released on ad interim anticipatory bail to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer."

Learned counsel for private respondent submits that the matter stands compromised and he has no objection if interim protection granted to the petitioner is made absolute.

Learned State counsel on instructions from ASI Sarabjeet Singh submits that petitioner has joined investigation and no custodial interrogation is required.

In view of the above, the petition is allowed and the interim bail granted to the petitioner vide order dated 22.08.2022 is made absolute subject to the conditions envisaged under Section 438(2) of Cr.P.C. If the petitioner or his family members/associates make any attempt to threat/intimidate the witnesses in the present case, the State would be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of bail granted by this order.

Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed as expression

-3of opinion of this Court on merits of the case and trial Court shall proceed without being prejudiced by observations of this Court. ( JAGMOHAN BANSAL ) JUDGE 16.02.2023 anju Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No