Dalbara Singh And ANR. v. State Of Punjab
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH 211/2 CRM-M-65171 of 2023 Date of decision:19.03.2024 Dalbara Singh and another ....Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab
...Respondents
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN Present :
Mr. Akshay Chadha, Advocate, for the petitioners.
PANKAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL) On 16.01.2024, the following order was passed :- "
! "
#$ %
#$
&
#
' '
(
)
"* $#$
+ ,
( $
% &
)
--
)+
.
$#$
-
."
/ 1 '2 # 3
/ 1
0
$ 4'
/
6
5
-
0
$ 4'
/
5
+
7
2.
Today, Ld. State Counsel on instructions from ASI Balwinder Singh, submits that the petitioners have already appeared before the trial Court and have furnished bail bonds and are no more required for custodial interrogation.
3.
Without commenting on the merits of the case and in view of the aforesaid fact, order dated 16.01.202 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 petitioners 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 petitioners.
6.
The petitioners 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 petitioners 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, non-
cooperating 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.
9.
!" #$
!
"