Sunil Kumar Prajapati And Another v. State Of Punjab

103-a IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-59118-2023 Date of Decision: December 20, 2023 Sunil Kumar and another

...Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA Present:- Mr. Lakshay Bector, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Harkanwar Jeet Singh, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. Parunjeet Singh, Advocate for the complainant. DEEPAK GUPTA , J.(Oral) As per statement made by learned State counsel, both the petitioners have since joined the investigation. However, Power of Attorney has been filed on behalf of the complainant and learned counsel for the complainant contends that Annexure P-6 is not the order qua petitioners as passed by learned Trial Court, rather it is regarding co-accused Atit and Samiti Devi @ Simmi Sharma.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has clarified that Annexure P-6 has been filed before this Court under a mistake. However, bail application of the petitioners was dismissed by the Sessions Court. Even otherwise, this petition is filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The order of Sessions Court is not under challenge before this Court. Since the petitioners have joined the investigation, therefore, the order dated 23.11.2023, whereby the petitioners were granted interim anticipatory bail, is hereby made absolute. However, they shall continue to join investigation, if and so required by the Investigating Officer. Disposed of.

December 20, 2023 (DEEPAK GUPTA) sarita JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking: Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No SARITA RANI 2023.12.19 16:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document/order