← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/59026/2023disposed of

Neeraj Singh v. State Of Punjab

2024-02-16Mr. Justice Pankaj Jain2 pages

2024:PHHC:022364

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-59026-2023 Date of decision : 16.02.2024 Neeraj Singh ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN Present :

Mr. Lovish Rattan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Jagjit Singh, DAG, Punjab.

PANKAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL) On 23.11.2023, the following order was passed :- "Instant petition has been filed under Section 438, Cr.P.C., for grant of anticipatory bail in:-  

 

      

  !

 

"#""#$

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that he obstructed the complainant, who is President of Milap Avenue Sewa Society during a campaign against the drug peddlers and attacked him. Counsel submits that specific allegation against the petitioner is of hitting the complainant with the backside of the Datar and in the scuffle, the turban of the complainant fell. He urges that there was no intention to hurt the religious sentiments of the complainant and the petitioner, who enjoys clean antecedents is prepared to join the investigation.

Notice of motion.

On asking of the Court, Mr.Arun Luthra, DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent - State. List on 16.02.2024.

Petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer on 08.12.2023 at 10:00 A.M. at Police Station Chheharta, District Amritsar, and join the investigation and appear as and when called by the Investigating Officer. In the event of arrest, he shall be admitted to interim bail on furnishing personal and surety bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. He shall also %

%&

   '

(

)

   "

  * Deepak Kumar 2024.02.17 09:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-59026-2023 -22024:PHHC:022364 2.

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

3.

Without commenting on the merits of the case and in view of the aforesaid fact, order dated 23.11.2023 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.

February 16, 2024 (Pankaj Jain) Dpr Judge Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No Deepak Kumar 2024.02.17 09:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document