Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SATNAM SINGH versus STATE OF PUNJAB

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Satnam Singh v. State of Punjab - CRM-58136-M-2006 [2006] RD-P&H 10000 (7 November 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Crl. Misc. No.58136-M of 2006

DATE OF DECISION:13.11.2006

Satnam Singh ..........Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ..........Respondent

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL
Present:- Shri Veneet Sharma, Advocate

for the petitioner.

Shri N.S. Gill, AAG,. Punjab.

****

Petitioner Santam Singh apprehending his arrest in a non- bailable offence in case FIR No. 13 dated 14.1.2006 under Sections 420/120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Mehta, Police District Majitha, District, has filed this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for anticipatory bail.

I have heard counsel for the parties and gone through the contents of the FIR.

Counsel for the petitioner contends that in the aforesaid case, the allegations against the petitioner and his brother Gurnam Singh are that they had taken an amount of Rs.1,40,000/- from the complainant for sending his son abroad. Counsel contends that the son of the complainant actually went to Kuwait and after serving there, on his request, he was repatriated to India. Counsel further contends that in such situation no offence against the petitioner is made out and he has not cheated the complainant. Counsel also contends that in the aforesaid case the petitioner has been wrongly declared as Proclaimed Officer as he was residing in Mumbai and no proper service was effected upon him because as per the statement of the Constable, who got the service effected, it has been reported that the service upon the petitioner was got effected by beat of drum.

Counsel for the petitioner further contends that in view of the order dated 21.9.2006, the petitioner has joined the investigation. Counsel for the respondent-State does not dispute this fact and further states that the petitioner is no more required for custodia interrogation.

In view of the above, the interim bail, granted vide order dated 21.9.2006 is made absolute subject to the same terms and conditions.

This bail order shall remain in operation till the investigation culminates into filing of challan under Section 173 Cr.P.C. except for material change in the circumstances. Thereafter the petitioner shall be entitled to the grant of regular bail by the trial Court and the same shall further continue till conclusion of the trial on the conditions to be imposed by the court of competent jurisdiction.

Disposed of accordingly.

November 13, 2006 (SATISH KUMAR MITTAL)

pooja JUDGE


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.