Pooja Sidhu v. State Of Punjab

In The High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh Date of Decision:- 25.1.2021 Pooja Sidhu ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL Present:- Mr. Barjinder Singh, Advocate for Mr. Rohan Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Sukhbeer Singh, AAG, Punjab, assisted by ASI Bhupinder Singh.

(Proceedings conducted through video conferencing) ***** GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J . (Oral) 1.

The petitioner seeks grant of anticipatory bail in a case registered vide FIR No. No. 0187 dated 27.10.2020, under Sections 353 and 186 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered at Police Station Anaj Mandi, District Patiala.

2.

At the time of issuance of notice of motion on 17.11.2020, the following order was passed :- "The petitioner is seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No. 0187 dated 27.10.2020, under Sections 353 and 186 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered at Police Station Anaj Mandi, District Patiala.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the allegations against the petitioner are that she had

- 2 - abused the police personnel and pulled down the mask of one of them. He also contends that the petitioner is a 38 year old lady with a minor child and is not involved in any other case.

Issue notice to the respondent.

At the asking of the Court, Mr. Dhruv Dayal, Senior DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State.

List on 14.12.2020.

In the meantime, the petitioner is directed to appear before the investigating/arresting officer and join investigation.

In the event of her arrest, the investigating/arresting officer shall release the petitioner on ad interim bail subject to her/his satisfaction. The petitioner shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C."

3.

Learned State counsel, upon instructions from ASI Bhupinder Singh has informed that pursuant to interim directions issued by this Court, the petitioner has joined the investigation and is not required for any custodial interrogation.

4.

I have considered rival submissions addressed before this Court. 5.

Having regard to the naure of allegations and the fact that the petitioner is a lady and has joined investigation and is not stated to be required for any custodial interrogation, the petition is accepted and the interim directions issued by this Court vide order dated 17.11.2020 are hereby made absolute subject to the condition that the petitioner shall join investigation as and when called upon to do so

- 3 - and cooperate with the Investigating Officer and shall also abide by the conditions as provided under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. January 25, 2021 (GURVINDER SINGH GILL) mohan JUDGE Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No