Sukhdev Singh Vs. State of Punjab

Sukhdev Singh vs State of Punjab

Type Court Judgment Court Punjab and Haryana Decided Mar 13, 2013

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1058986

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1058986
Court: Punjab and Haryana High Court
Decided On: Mar 13, 2013
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Criminal

Key legal issue: Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sukhdev Singh

Respondent

State of Punjab

Excerpt

.....i have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record carefully. coordinate bench of this court while issuing notice of motion on 24.1.2013 passed the following order: “it is a case of version and cross-version. on the side of the petitioner, thumb of one of the person was chopped off. it would be seen during the cours.of investigation and trial as to which side was the aggressor. notice of motion for 27.2.2013. in the meanwhile, in the event of arrest of the petitioner, he shall be released on anticipatory bail to the satisfaction of the arresting officer, subject to the conditions contained in section 438(2) cr.p.c.he will join the investigation as and when required.” crl.m.not m-1775 of 2013(o&m) -2- it has been stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that pursuant to the said order, the petitioner has already joined the investigation. it has been stated by learned state counsel as well on instructions from asi bhagwan singh that the petitioner has joined the investigation and that he is no more required for any custodial interrogation by the police. bail application is not opposed. 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. in view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, order dated 24.1.2013, granting interim bail to petitioner-sukhdev singh is, hereby made absolute subject to the compliance of conditions contained in section 438(2) cr.p.c.the present petition stands disposed of accordingly. 13.3.2013 (ram chand gupta) meenu judge

Full Judgment

Crl.M.not M-1775 of 2013(O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Crl.M.not M-1775 of 2013(O&M) Date of Decision: March 13, 2013 Sukhdev Singh .....Petitioner v.

State of Punjab ......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr.L.M.Gulati, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr.P.S.Paul, DAG, Punjab....RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) The present petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C.is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in cross case under Sections 326, 452, 324, 148, 149 IPC recorded in case FIR No.216, dated 14.12.2011, under Sections 452, 324, 323, 148, 149, 506 IPC, registered at Police Station Chheharta, District Amritsar City.

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

Coordinate Bench of this Court while issuing notice of motion on 24.1.2013 passed the following order: “It is a case of version and cross-version.

On the side of the petitioner, thumb of one of the person was chopped off.

It would be seen during the couRs.of investigation and trial as to which side was the aggressor.

Notice of motion for 27.2.2013.

In the meanwhile, in the event of arrest of the petitioner, he shall be released on anticipatory bail to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to the conditions contained in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.He will join the investigation as and when required.”

Crl.M.not M-1775 of 2013(O&M) -2- It has been stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that pursuant to the said order, the petitioner has already joined the investigation.

It has been stated by learned State counsel as well on instructions from ASI Bhagwan Singh that the petitioner has joined the investigation and that he is no more required for any custodial interrogation by the police.

Bail application is not opposed.

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.

In view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, order dated 24.1.2013, granting interim bail to petitioner-Sukhdev Singh is, hereby made absolute subject to the compliance of conditions contained in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.The present petition stands disposed of accordingly.

13.3.2013 (Ram Chand Gupta) meenu Judge

Same Court & Year Punjab and Haryana · 2013 Same Parties Sukhdev Singh vs State of Punjab Same Subject Criminal