High CourtsSINGLE BENCH(2017) 09 P&H CK 0023

Kashmir Singh vs State of Punjab

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 26 September 2017

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anupinder Singh Grewal
RESULT
Disposed
CASE NUMBER
M-21845 of 2017 (O&M)

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

15 paragraphs · 365 words

CRM-30840-2017

1.

This is application for exemption from filing certified copies of Annexures P-3 to P-7 as well as placing on record the photostat copies of the same.

2.

The application is allowed and Annexures P-3 to P-7 are taken on record subject to all just exceptions.

CRM-30841-2017

3.

This is application for placing on record Affidavit of the petitioner dated 13.09.2017.

4.

Application is allowed and affidavit of the petitioner dated 13.09.2017 is taken on record.

CRM No. M-21845-2017

5.

The petitioner is seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No. 81 dated 13.05.2017 under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Lopoke, District Amritsar (Rural).

6.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the allegations against the petitioner are that in the year 1992, he had identified Lakha Singh as guarantor for Gurnam Singh who had obtained loan for purchase of a truck from Punjab Financial Corporation. He further contends that the entire amount, which was due to the Punjab Financial Corporation, has been paid by the petitioner and his brother-Manjit Singh.

7.

Learned counsel for the complainant contends that an amount of `1,10,000/- remains to be paid by the petitioner to the complainant, as the complainant had himself paid that amount to Punjab Financial Corporation to save the land from auction.

8.

Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes that if any amount has to be paid by the petitioner, he will pay the same.

9.

This Court vide order dated 06.07.2017, had directed the petitioner to join investigation and in the event of his arrest, he was to be released on ad-interim bail to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer, subject to the conditions envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

10.

Learned State counsel, upon instructions from HC Major Singh states that in pursuance to the order dated 06.07.2017 the petitioner has joined investigation and is not required for custodial interrogation.

11.

In view of the above and without expressing any opinion on the merits of case, the order dated 06.07.2017, granting ad-interim bail to the petitioner, is hereby made absolute. However, the petitioner shall abide by the conditions envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

The petition stands disposed of accordingly.