High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Hardeep Singh & Others vs State Of Punjab on 21 October, 2008

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Hardeep Singh & Others vs State Of Punjab on 21 October, 2008
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH



                     Criminal Miscellaneous No. M-23834 of 2008
                                  Date of Decision: October 21, 2008


Hardeep Singh & Others
                                                           .....PETITIONER(S)

                                    VERSUS


State of Punjab
                                                         .....RESPONDENT(S)
                                .      .      .


CORAM:        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA


PRESENT: -    Mr. Ritesh Pandey, Advocate, for
              the petitioners.

              Mr. H.S. Brar, Deputy                       Advocate
              General, Punjab.


                                .      .      .

AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral)

On 15.9.2008, while issuing notice of

motion, the following has been noticed:-

“This petition has been filed under Section
438 Cr.P.C. praying for anticipatory bail to the
petitioners in FIR No.46 dated 02.08.2008 under
Sections 326/324/148/148/149 IPC (later on Section
307 IPC was added), P.S. Dera Baba Nanak, Police
Distt. Batala, District Gurdaspur.

Contention of the learned counsel is that
none of the petitioners has been attributed injury on
account of which Section 326 or 307 IPC has been
invoked. It has further been pointed out that
petitioners no. 1 & 2 have been attributed lalkara
only whereas the injury attributed to petitioner no. 3
was on the left leg and simple in nature. Learned
counsel has also contended that the petitioners have
been in possession of the land for the last 20 years
continuously and a civil court decree is also in
favour of the petitioners side. The FIR itself is after
18 days of the alleged incident.”

Learned counsel for the respondent-

Crl. Misc. No. M-23834 of 2008 [2]

State, on instructions from Sarwan Singh, Head

Constable, states that the petitioners have joined

the investigation and are not required for further

investigation at this stage.

In view of the statement of learned

counsel for the respondent-State, this petition is

allowed.

Order dated 15.9.2008 is hereby made

absolute and it is directed that in the event of

arrest, the petitioners shall be enlarged on bail on

furnishing of bail bonds to the satisfaction of the

Arresting/Investigating Officer, subject to the

following conditions :-

“(i) The petitioners shall make themselves available
for interrogation as and when required;

(ii) 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; and

(iii) The petitioners shall not leave India without
the previous permission of the Court.”

This order shall enure till 10 days after the

petitioner receives a notice of filing of final

report u/s 173, Cr.P.C. within which period, the

petitioner would be at liberty to apply for regular

bail.



                                                               (AJAI LAMBA)
October 21, 2008                                                  JUDGE
avin