High CourtsSingle Bench

Vicky Singh vs State Of Punjab

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 25 November 2021 · Citation: (2021) 11 P&H CK 0109

HON’BLE JUDGES
Harsimran Singh Sethi, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 148, 149, 323, 427, 458 · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438, 438(2)
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Petition (M) No. 37233 Of 2021
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

25 paragraphs · 670 words

Harsimran Singh Sethi, J

The petitioner is seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No. 190, dated 11.07.2021, registered under Sections 458, 427, 323, 148, 149 IPC at Police Station Lambi, District Sri Muktsar Sahib.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has joined investigation in terms of order passed by this Court dated 09.09.2021. Order dated 09.09.2021 is as under:-

"Present petition has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C for the grant of anticipatory bail in respect of FIR No. 190, dated 11.07.2021, registered under Sections 458, 427, 323, 148, 149 IPC at Police Station Lambi, District Sri Muktsar Sahib.

Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present FIR and even otherwise, the injuries which have been attributed to the petitioner, are simple in nature. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the other co-accused are already granted anticipatory bail and the petitioner is ready to join the investigation and cooperate, therefore, he be given the concession of anticipatory bail.

Notice of motion.

Mr. Sandeep Singh Deol, learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, who has joined the proceedings through video conference, keeping in view the service of advance copy of petition, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State.

Learned counsel for the respondent-State concedes that the injuries attributed to the petitioner are simple in nature and further the co-accused are already on anticipatory bail.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record with their able assistance.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances noticed hereinbefore, especially that the injuries attributed to the petitioner are simple in nature and the co-accused have already been extended the benefit of anticipatory bail, the purpose of investigation will be achieved in case, petitioner is also directed to join the investigation and cooperate.

As the petitioner has undertaken to join the investigation and co-operate with the same, he has made out a case for the grant of anticipatory bail.

Petitioner is directed to join the investigation forthwith. In the event of his arrest, he shall be released on interim bail to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Investigating

Officer on his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to his/her satisfaction subject to the following conditions:

i) That he shall make himself available for interrogation by the police officer as and when required.

(ii) That he shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from from disclosing the said facts to the Court or to any police officer.

(iii) That he shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court.

(iv) That he shall abide by all the conditions as enshrined under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C.

Adjourned to 25.11.2021.

It is, however, made clear that after the petitioner join the investigation, in case any incriminating material comes against the petitioner, the respondent-State will be at liberty to file appropriate application seeking the custody of the petitioner in case, the same is needed."

Learned State counsel, who has also joined the proceedings through video conference, on instructions from ASI Baldev Singh, states that in terms of the order of this Court reproduced before, the petitioner has joined the investigation and no further interrogation is required at this stage.

Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes that petitioner will join investigation and also cooperate with the investigating agency in case he is required for the same in future as well.

In view of the above, the order dated 09.09.2021 granting interim bail to the petitioner is made absolute.

However, the petitioner shall abide by the conditions stipulated under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. He shall also join investigation as and when called upon to do so.

In case at any given point of time hereinafter, it is felt by the investigating agency that petitioner is required for the investigation but is not cooperating, they will be at liberty to approach this Court for passing appropriate orders.

The petition stands disposed of.