Harpreet Singh v. State Of Punjab And ANR

CRM-M-54108-2019 -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH.

Criminal Misc. No.M-54108 of 2019 (O&M) Date of Decision: December 18, 2019 Harpreet Singh ......PETITIONER(s).

VERSUS

State of Punjab and another ....RESPONDENT(s).

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA

Present:

Ms. Monika Thakur, Advocate for the petitioner (s).

******* SURINDER GUPTA, J.

This is petition under Section 439(2) read with Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure for cancellation of bail allowed to respondent No.2 vide order dated 01.10.2019 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana in case FIR No.167 dated 24.08.2019 registered at Police Station Dehlon for the offence punishable under Section 306 of Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No.2 had stolen 254 cheques of petitioner when she was working with him for his export orders. She presented some of the cheques for encashment to the bank between the period 2013 to 2015. On the dishonour of those cheques, she filed complaints against the petitioner and harassed him and his family. Due to that reason, father of petitioner committed suicide on 23.08.2019. He had left behind a suicide note levelling allegations against respondent SACHIN MEHTA 2019.12.18 17:13 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh

CRM-M-54108-2019 -2No.2 but the learned Court below allowed anticipatory bail to respondent No.2 without looking into the gravity of the offence. Perusal of order dated 01.10.2019 passed by the Court below shows that while allowing anticipatory bail to respondent No.2, it has taken note of the fact that it is a debatable issue whether respondent No.2 has instigated or abetted committing of suicide by Balwinder Singh, father of petitioner.

As per submission of learned counsel for the petitioner, cheques were stolen about 6 years back, presented to the bank about 4 to 5 years back and complaints were also filed 4 to 5 years back. The complaints are stated to have been filed against the petitioner and not against the deceased.

Keeping in view the above facts, I am of the considered opinion that learned Court below has committed no error while releasing respondent No.2 on anticipatory bail as it is a matter of investigation to ascertain as to whether respondent No.2 had committed any such act which can be termed as abetment to commit suicide by the deceased. This petition has no merits. Dismissed.

( SURINDER GUPTA ) December 18, 2019 JUDGE Sachin M.

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No SACHIN MEHTA 2019.12.18 17:13 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh