CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

Anil Kumar vs State of Punjab

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 16 November 2010 · Citation: (2010) 1 SLR 94

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ram Chand Gupta, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 438, 438(2) · Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 148, 149, 307, 323, 324
CASE NUMBER
Criminal M. No. M 29599 of 2010 (O and 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

12 paragraphs · 359 words

Ram chand gupta, J.—The present petition filed u/s 438 Code of Criminal Procedure is for grant of anticipatory bail to the Petitioner in FIR No. 106, dated 13.3.2010, registered under Sections 307, 452, 324, 323, 427, 148, 149 IPC, at Police Station Sadar, Amritsar.

2.

I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record carefully.

3.

A coordinate Bench of this Court while issuing notice of motion on 6.10.2010, passed the following order:

Petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered at the instance of Deepak Kumar alleging that the Petitioner along with others had inflicted injuries on the person of brother of the complainant.

Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the simple injury is attributed to the Petitioner and that the matter has been compromised.

Notice of motion for 16.11.2010.

Meanwhile, an interim direction is issued that the Petitioner will join the investigation on 23.10.2010, between 10.00 AM to 4.00 PM. However, in case of Petitioner doing so, he shall be released on interim bail to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer.

4.

It has been stated by learned Counsel for the Petitioner that pursuant to the said order, the Petitioner has already joined the investigation. It is further contended that on similar facts, co-accused Hardeep Singh has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in Crl.M. No. M-23046 of 2010.

5.

It has been stated by learned State counsel as well that the Petitioner has joined the investigation and that he is no more required for any custodial interrogation by the police, in view of the assertion that dispute has since been compromised.

6.

There are no allegations on behalf of the State that Petitioner is likely to abscond or that he is likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts in the Court, if released on bail.

7.

In view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, order dated 6.10.2010, granting interim bail to Petitioner-Anil Kumar, is, hereby made absolute subject to the compliance of conditions contained in Section 438(2) Code of Criminal Procedure

8.

The present petition stands disposed of accordingly.