Ayush Brahman Alias Ayush Mishra v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 16.11.2023 AYUSH BRAHMAN ALIAS AYUSH MISHRA ....Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB ....Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN Present :

Mr. Lakshay Bector, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Tarun Aggarwal, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

PANKAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL) Apprehending his arrest in FIR No.309 dated 09.11.2022, registered for offences punishable under Sections 436 & 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Sahnewal, District Ludhiana, the petitioner has preferred this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking prearrest bail. 2.

On 14.09.2023, the following order was passed :- "Notice of motion.

On advance service of copy of petition, learned State counsel appears and accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State of Punjab and seeks time to get instructions. Adjourned to 16.11.2023.

In the meanwhile, petitioner shall join investigation, as and when required by the Investigating Agency and subject to his reporting to the Investigating Officer within two weeks from

today, no coercive steps qua arrest of the petitioner shall be taken. In case his arrest is required to be caused, petitioner shall be released on bail by the Arresting Officer till the next date of hearing on his furnishing personal bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting Officer. Petitioner shall also abide by all the conditions as envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C."

3.

Today, Ld. State Counsel on instructions from ASI Ram Murti submits that the petitioner has already joined investigation and is no more required for custodial interrogation.

4.

Without commenting on the merits of the case and in view of the aforesaid fact, order dated 14.09.2023 is made absolute, subject to the conditions as enumerated under Sections 438(2) Cr.P.C. 5.

This order should not be treated as "blanket" order. It will not be read granting the petitioner indefinite protection from arrest. It shall be confined to the FIR mentioned ibid and will not operate in respect of any other incident that involves commission of an offence. 6.

This order does not in any manner limit or restrict the rights or duties of the police or investigating agency to investigate into the charges against the petitioner.

7.

The petitioner shall be deemed to be in custody for the purpose of Section 27 of the Evidence Act in regard to a discovery of facts made in pursuance of information supplied by the petitioner in case the occasion arises.

8.

It will be open to the police or the investigating agency to

move this Court for a direction under Section 439(2) Cr.P.C. to arrest the accused, in the event of violation of any term, such as absconding, noncooperating during investigation, evasion, intimidation or inducement to witnesses with a view to influence outcome of the investigation or trial. 9.

Petition stands disposed off accordingly.

November 16, 2023 (Pankaj Jain) Dpr Judge Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No