CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

Raminder Singh vs State of Punjab and Another

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 16 August 2013 · Citation: (2013) 08 P&H CK 0874

HON’BLE JUDGES
Mehinder Singh Sullar, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 438 · Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI) — Section 138
CASE NUMBER
CRM No. M-24828 of 2013
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 · 368 words

Mehinder Singh Sullar, J.—Petitioner-Raminder Singh son of Swaran Singh, has preferred the instant petition for anticipatory bail in a complaint case instituted by complainant-respondent No. 2 Gurdeep Singh son of Harnek Singh, in which, he was summoned to face the trial, for an offence punishable u/s 138 of The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1885, by the trial Court, invoking the provisions of Section 438 Cr.P.C. Notice of the petition was issued to the State.

2.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, going through the record with their valuable assistance and after considering the entire matter deeply, to my mind, the present petition for anticipatory bail deserves to be accepted in this context.

3.

During the course of preliminary hearing, the following order was passed by this Court on August 01, 2013:--

Learned counsel, inter alia, contended that the complainant has filed a false complaint (Annexure P-1), against the petitioner, u/s 138 of The Negotiable Instruments Act, in which, he was granted bail. Subsequently, as he (petitioner) could not appear in the Court, on account of chronic liver disease of his father and illness of his wife, so, the trial Court has cancelled his bail, issued non-bailable warrants and declared proclaimed offender, without any legal basis.

Heard.

Notice of motion be issued to the respondent, returnable for 16.08.2013.

Meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to appear/surrender before the next date of hearing and the trial Court would admit him on (provisional) bail on his filing a specific affidavit that he will regularly appear in the trial Court and furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds to its satisfaction.

4.

At the very outset, the learned counsel for the petitioner has placed on record his affidavit to the effect that the petitioner has already appeared in the trial Court on 14.08.2013, in pursuance of the order of this Court and moved an application for bail. The trial Court has adjourned the case for 30.08.2013 for summoning the record of the case and for accepting the bail bond. In the light of aforesaid reasons, the instant petition for anticipatory bail is accepted and the interim (provisional) bail already granted to the petitioner, vide order dated August 01, 2013, is hereby made absolute.