Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

HARDEEP SINGH versus STATE OF PUNJAB

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


HARDEEP SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB - CRM-9751-M-2006 [2006] RD-P&H 854 (16 February 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

CRL. MISC. NO. 9751-M OF 2006 (O&M)

DATE OF DECISION: 28.2.2006

HARDEEP SINGH

...PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB

...RESPONDENT

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL
PRESENT: Mr L.M. Gulati, Advocate,

for the petitioner.

Ms Reeta Kohli, DAG, Punjab.

-----

ORDER:

Heard.

Offence alleged is under section 420 IPC.

Allegation against the petitioner is that he sold property to the complainant, which was not owned by him.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had all the authority to sell the property and the complainant is in possession and nobody else has put forward any claim to the title of the property and thus, grievance of the complainant is primarily of civil nature, and in any case, the petitioner is willing to join investigation and face proceedings in accordance with law.

Counsel for the State says that the petitioner has been declared Proclaimed Offender.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had applied for anticipatory bail, which was dismissed by the Court of Session on 13.1.2006 and thereafter, the petitioner has filed the present petition in this court, which is pending and the petitioner will appear before the investigating agency as and when required and in the first instance on 6.3.2006 at 11 A.M.

Without expressing any final opinion on merits, the petitioner is granted anticipatory bail till conclusion of investigation or three months whichever is later during which the petitioner will be free to apply for regular bail to the concerned court in accordance with law.

In the event of arrest, the petitioner will be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the arresting officer within two weeks from today on the conditions that the petitioner will 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; he will not interfere with the prosecution evidence directly or indirectly; he will not leave the country without the previous permission of the court; he will associate with the investigation as and when called by the police and that he will surrender the passport, if any.

The petition is disposed of accordingly.

February 28, 2006 ( ADARSH KUMAR GOEL )

sanjeev 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.