Sukhchain Singh v. State Of Punjab






IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-52015-2023 Date of decision : 31.01.2024 SUKHCHAIN SINGH ....Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB ....Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN Present :

Mr. Manjinder S. Saini, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Tarun Aggarwal, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

PANKAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL) On 13.10.2023, the following order was passed :- "Apprehending his arrest in FIR No.167 dated 30.07.2023, registered for offences punishable under Sections 307, 325, 323, 148, 149, 341 and 427 of IPC at Police Station City Moga, District Moga, the petitioner has preferred this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking pre-arrest bail. Counsel for the petitioner inter alia submits that from the bare perusal of the FIR, it is evident that the complainant was not even aware about the name of the petitioner, yet attributed specific injuries to the present petitioner and in fact present FIR is counter blast of FIR No.166 dated 02.08.2023, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 379-B and 341 of IPC, at Police Station Dharamkot, District Moga.

Notice of motion for 31.01.2024.

On the asking of the Court, Mr. Tarun Aggarwal, Sr. DAG, Punjab, who is present in Court accepts notice. In the meantime, in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on interim bail subject to his furnishing personal and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/ Investigating Officer. As and when called, the petitioner shall join the investigation. He shall abide by the conditions enumerated under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C." 2.

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

Deepak Kumar 2024.01.31 17:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-52015-2023 -22024:PHHC:012920 3.

Without commenting on the merits of the case and in view of the aforesaid fact, order dated 13.10.2023 is made absolute, subject to the conditions as enumerated under Sections 438(2) Cr.P.C. 4.

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. 5.

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.

6.

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.

7.

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. 8.

Petition stands disposed off accordingly.

January 31, 2024 (Pankaj Jain) Dpr Judge Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No Deepak Kumar 2024.01.31 17:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document