Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Mohinder Kumar Vs. State of Punjab

Mohinder Kumar vs State of Punjab

Type Court Judgment Court Punjab and Haryana Decided Jan 31, 2013
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1072329

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

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Punjab and Haryana High Court
Decided On
Subject
Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Mohinder Kumar

Respondent

State of Punjab

Excerpt

in the high court of punjab and haryana at chandigarh crm-m no.232 of 2013 (o&m) date of decision:31. 1.2013 mohinder kumar ......petitioner versus state of punjab .......respondent coram: hon'ble mrs.justice sabina present: mr.b.d.sharma, advocate, for the petitioner. mr.k.d.s.sidhu, addl.a.g, punjab. mr.vivek thakur, advocate, for the complainant. **** sabina, j. this petition has been filed under section 438 of the code of criminal procedure for grant of anticipatory bail in case fir no.254 dated 28.11.2012, under sections 406/ 420 of the indian penal code, 1860 registered at police station bawa khel, jalandhar. while issuing notice of motion, the following order was passed by this court on 8.1.2013:- “ learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in fact the complainant and her friend were working as travel agents. petitioner had given ` 2,50,000/- to the complainant and her friend for sending his son abroad. however, the son of the petitioner was crm-m no.232 of 2013 (o&m) -2- not sent abroad. some of the amount was returned to the petitioner by the complainant. the complainant with a view to escape her liability from repayment of the money, paid by the petitioner to her, has falsely involved the petitioner in this case. notice of motion for 31.1.2013. in the meantime, in the event of arrest, petitioner be admitted to interim bail subject to the satisfaction of the arresting officer. he shall abide by the conditions envisaged under section 438 (2) of the code of criminal procedure, 1973.” learned state counsel, on instructions from hc binder singh has submitted that the petitioner has joined investigation in terms of the order reproduced above. accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the order dated 8.1.2013, granting interim bail to the petitioner, is made absolute. petition stands disposed of accordingly. (sabina) judge january 31, 2013 anita

Full Judgment

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh CRM-M No.232 of 2013 (O&M) Date of decision:

31. 1.2013 Mohinder Kumar ......Petitioner Versus State of Punjab .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr.B.D.Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr.K.D.S.Sidhu, Addl.A.G, Punjab.

Mr.Vivek Thakur, Advocate, for the complainant.

**** SABINA, J.

This petition has been filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.254 dated 28.11.2012, under Sections 406/ 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 registered at Police Station Bawa Khel, Jalandhar.

While issuing notice of motion, the following order was passed by this Court on 8.1.2013:- “ Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in fact the complainant and her friend were working as travel agents.

Petitioner had given ` 2,50,000/- to the complainant and her friend for sending his son abroad.

However, the son of the petitioner was CRM-M No.232 of 2013 (O&M) -2- not sent abroad.

Some of the amount was returned to the petitioner by the complainant.

The complainant with a view to escape her liability from repayment of the money, paid by the petitioner to her, has falsely involved the petitioner in this case.

Notice of motion for 31.1.2013.

In the meantime, in the event of arrest, petitioner be admitted to interim bail subject to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer.

He shall abide by the conditions envisaged under Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.”

Learned State counsel, on instructions from HC Binder Singh has submitted that the petitioner has joined investigation in terms of the order reproduced above.

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the order dated 8.1.2013, granting interim bail to the petitioner, is made absolute.

Petition stands disposed of accordingly.

(SABINA) JUDGE January 31, 2013 anita

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial