Satyavir Singh v. State Of Punjab

CRM-M-45178-2022 2023:PHHC:059462

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-45178-2022 (O&M) Date of order: 26.04.2023 Satyavir Singh

...Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Punjab

...Respondent(s)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present:- Mr. Harish Mehla, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

Mr. Virat Rana, AAG, Punjab.

**** ANOOP CHITKARA, J. (Oral) FIR No.

Dated Police Station Sections 12.8.2022 City Kharar, District SAS Nagar 406, 420, 465, 467, 471, 120B IPC 1.

The petitioner apprehending arrest in the FIR captioned above, has come up before this Court under Section 438 CrPC seeking anticipatory bail. 2.

The accused has not declared his criminal antecedents in the petition. 3.

Vide order dated 11.04.2023, the petitioner was granted interim protection, which is continuing till date.

4.

The petitioner's counsel submits that the petitioner has declared all his assets in terms of the previous order and his custodial investigation would serve no purpose whatsoever, and the pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and family.

5.

The State's counsel opposes the bail.

6.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a bona fide purchaser of the alleged vehicle and he had paid the money in good faith to the complainant and her daughter, but because of matrimonial discord amongst the daughter of the present complainant and her husband, he has been implicated in the present case. ASHWANI KUMAR 2023.04.28 13:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

CRM-M-45178-2022 2023:PHHC:059462 7.

Thus, there would be no justification to keep this bail pending waiting for the proper investigation. The petitioner was granted interim protection, and during the interregnum, there is no allegation that he had intimidated the victim or victim's family or the witnesses or that he had hampered the investigation, or despite being called to join the investigation, he did not appear before the investigator. Given the above, there would be no justification to discontinue the interim protection, and the same is made absolute subject to the petitioner complying with the terms of the bail order with a further direction that as and when the petitioner returns home he will appear before the Investigating Officer and join investigation. 8.

Accordingly, the present petition allowed and interim order is made absolute. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE April 26, 2023 AK Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes Whether reportable :

No ASHWANI KUMAR 2023.04.28 13:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment