Harchand Singh Alias Chandu v. State Of Punjab

2023:PHHC:128725 CRM-M-45483-2023 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-45483-2023 Date of Decision: 04.10.2023 Harchand Singh alias Chandu ...... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ......... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJBIR SEHRAWAT Present :

Mr. Prince Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Jaspal Singh Guru, AAG, Punjab, for the respondent.

***** RAJBIR SEHRAWAT, J. (ORAL) 1.

The present first petition has been filed under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.106 dated 23.05.2023, registered under Sections 336, 427 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, (Sections 386, 506 and 201 of the IPC were added later on) and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959, at Police Station Mahilpur, Tehsil Mahilpur, District Hoshiarpur.

2.

Pursuant to the previous order dated 13.09.2023, Ms. Anita Punj, ADGP, Director, Maharaja Ranjit Singh Punjab Police Academy, Phillaur (Punjab), is present in Court today and has submitted that the academy has already initiated efforts on the 'training module' qua investigation with reference to the digital material. The Academy shall also co-ordinate with the Investigation Bureau and all the Senior Superintendent VIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI 2023.10.05 18:13 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh

2023:PHHC:128725 CRM-M-45483-2023 -2of Police to sensitize the Investigation Officers of various cases; to find out and to place on record the digital evidence, if any, available in the individual cases.

3.

Further personal appearance of the said officer is dispensed with.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to the interim order dated 13.09.2023, the petitioner has joined the investigation. 5.

It is pointed out by learned counsel for the respondent-State, on instructions from SI Satnam Singh, submits that although, the petitioner has joined the investigation, however, he has not co-operated during the investigation. The allegation against the petitioner is that he fired upon a jewelry shop with the pistol. The pistol is yet to be recovered. 6.

In view of the above, this Court does not find it appropriate to continue the interim protection or to continue with the present petition; any more.

7.

Dismissed.

(RAJBIR SEHRAWAT) JUDGE 04.10.2023 adhikari Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No VIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI 2023.10.05 18:13 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh