High CourtsSINGLE BENCH

Jaspreet Singh vs The State of Punjab

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 14 November 2017 · Citation: (2017) 11 P&H CK 0026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anupinder Singh Grewal
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
<a href=3863>Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973</a>, <a href=3863-438>Section 438(2)</a> - Direction for grant of bail to person apprehending arrest · <a href=1767>Indian Penal Code, 1860</a>, <a href=1767-447>Section 447</a>, <a href=1767-148>Sect
RESULT
Disposed
CASE NUMBER
M-38064 of 2017(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

29 paragraphs · 280 words
1.

The petitioner is seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No. 1,

dated 07.01.2016, under Sections 336, 447, 427, 506, 148, 149 IPC

(Section 380 IPC added later on) and under Sections 25(1), 27(1) of the

Arms Act, registered at Police Station Harike, District Tarn Taran.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the

allegations against the petitioner are that he along with other co-

accused ploughed the wheat crop and tried to take forcible possession

of the land. He, however, contends that the land is Shamlat Deh and is

in illegal possession of the complainant for which the Gram Panchayat

has already sent several representations (Annexures P-3 to P-7) to the

competent authority. He also contends that no injury is alleged to

have been caused in the incident and other co-accused, namely,

Yadwinder Singh in CRM No. M-30638 of 2017 and Satpal Singh in CRM

No. M-30626 of 2017 have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court

on 22.09.2017.

3.

This Court vide order dated 09.10.2017, had directed

the petitioner to appear before the trial Court and in the event of

his arrest, he was to be released on interim bail to the satisfaction

of the trial Court.

4.

Learned State counsel upon instructions from ASI

Balwinder Singh states that in pursuance to the order dated

09.10.2017 the petitioner has joined investigation and is not

required for custodial interrogation.

5.

In view of the above and without expressing any

opinion on the merits of case, the order dated 09.10.2017,

granting ad-interim bail to the petitioner, is hereby made

absolute. However, the petitioner shall abide by the conditions

envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

6.

The petition stands disposed of accordingly.