High CourtsSingle Bench

Amarjit Kaur vs State Of Punjab

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 26 May 2022 · Citation: (2022) 05 P&H CK 0119

HON’BLE JUDGES
Arvind Singh Sangwan, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Arms Act, 1959 — Section 25 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 120B, 336, 506 · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438(2)
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Petition (M) No. 52477 Of 2021 (O&M)
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 301 words

Arvind Singh Sangwan, J

The petitioner prays for grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No.91, dated 11.11.2021, registered under Sections 336, 506, 120-B of IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act at Police Station Dera Baba Nanak, District Gurdaspur.

The operative part of the order dated 16.12.2021, vide which interim anticipatory bail has been granted to the petitioner, is reproduced as under:-

“....Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that there was a dispute that took place on 10.11.2021 at about 7.00 PM. It is alleged that the complainant was standing on his land when Arwinder Singh son of Harbhajan Singh while driving his tractor came to the land along with Harbhajan Singh and they damaged the khal. It is alleged that Arwinder Singh took out a revolver and fired a gunshot in the air. Counsel would contend that the petitioner is not named in the FIR and has been nominated as an accused on the basis of disclosure statement given by said Harbhajan Singh who was accompanying Arwinder Singh. Said Harbhjaan Singh has now been released on regular bail by the JMIC. Counsel would urge that the allegation that the petitioner would know about the tractor is patently false. She is not the owner of the tractor.

Notice of motion for 26.05.2022....”

Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that, in pursuance to the order dated 16.12.2021, the petitioner has appeared before the Investigating Officer and has joined the investigation.

Counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Raghubir Singh, has not disputed the aforesaid fact and submits that the petitioner is no more required for further investigation.

In view of the above, this petition is allowed and the interim bail granted to the petitioner vide order dated 16.12.2021 is made absolute subject to the conditions envisaged under Section 438(2)Cr.P.C.