Mr. Arshvinder Singh Addl.A.G. Punjab Assisted Vs. State of Punjab - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1152380
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided OnJun-17-2014
AppellantMr. Arshvinder Singh Addl.A.G. Punjab Assisted
RespondentState of Punjab
Excerpt:
crm-m-20181 of 2014 1 in the high court of punjab and haryana at chandigarh. crm-m-20181 of 2014 date of decision:17.6.2014 jagdish singh and another ..petitioners versus state of punjab ..respondent coram: hon'ble mr justice rajive bhalla present: mr.r.s.dhaliwal, advocate, for the petitioners.mr.arshvinder singh, addl.a.g.,punjab assisted by mr.parveen kumar garg, advocate, for the complainant. rajive bhalla, j. (oral) prayer in this petition is for grant of pre-arrest bail. vide order dated 9.6.2014, pre-arrest bail was granted to the petitioners subject to the following conditions:- “ (i) a condition that the petitioners shall made themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) a condition that the petitioners 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 disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer; varinder kumar 2014.06.19 14:46 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court chandigarh crm-m-20181 of 2014 2 (iii) a condition that the petitioners shall not leave india without the previous permission of the court; counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have joined investigation, recoveries have been effected and the petitioners are not required for any further interrogation. counsel for the state of punjab submits that as the petitioners have joined investigation, recoveries have been effected and investigation is complete and the police does not require the petitioners for any further interrogation, at this stage. counsel for the complainant, however, submits that as a part of the little finger of the left hand of the complainant, has been amputated and he has also received sword injuries, the prayer for pre-arrest bail may be rejected. counsel for the petitioners.on the other hand, submits that parties are closely related, petitioner no.1 is the father and petitioner no.2 is a brother of the complainant. a civil suit is already pending and the alleged injury on the little finger, is self suffered. i have heard counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the petitioners have joined investigation and are not required for further interrogation, no useful purpose would be served by declining the prayer made in the present petition. as a consequence, order dated 9.6.2014 is made absolute. the petition stands disposed of accordingly. 17.6.2014 ( rajive bhalla ) vk varinder kumar judge201406.19 14:46 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court chandigarh
Judgment:

CRM-M-20181 of 2014 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

CRM-M-20181 of 2014 Date of Decision:17.6.2014 Jagdish Singh and another ..Petitioners Versus State of Punjab ..Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA Present: Mr.R.S.Dhaliwal, Advocate, for the petitioneRs.Mr.Arshvinder Singh, Addl.A.G.,Punjab assisted by Mr.Parveen Kumar Garg, Advocate, for the complainant.

RAJIVE BHALLA, J.

(ORAL) Prayer in this petition is for grant of pre-arrest bail.

Vide order dated 9.6.2014, pre-arrest bail was granted to the petitioners subject to the following conditions:- “ (i) a condition that the petitioners shall made themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) a condition that the petitioners 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 disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; Varinder Kumar 2014.06.19 14:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRM-M-20181 of 2014 2 (iii) a condition that the petitioners shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court; Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have joined investigation, recoveries have been effected and the petitioners are not required for any further interrogation.

Counsel for the State of Punjab submits that as the petitioners have joined investigation, recoveries have been effected and investigation is complete and the police does not require the petitioners for any further interrogation, at this stage.

Counsel for the complainant, however, submits that as a part of the little finger of the left hand of the complainant, has been amputated and he has also received sword injuries, the prayer for pre-arrest bail may be rejected.

Counsel for the petitioneRs.on the other hand, submits that parties are closely related, petitioner no.1 is the father and petitioner no.2 is a brother of the complainant.

A civil suit is already pending and the alleged injury on the little finger, is self suffered.

I have heard counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the petitioners have joined investigation and are not required for further interrogation, no useful purpose would be served by declining the prayer made in the present petition.

As a consequence, order dated 9.6.2014 is made absolute.

The petition stands disposed of accordingly.

17.6.2014 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) VK Varinder Kumar JUDGE201406.19 14:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh