High Courts(1997) 09 P&H CK 0089

Manjit Kaur Jhanji vs State of Punjab

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 4 September 1997 · Citation: (1998) 2 AICLR 98 : (1998) 1 RCR(Criminal) 62

HON’BLE JUDGES
S.S.Sudhalkar, J
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 15940-M of 1996

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

6 paragraphs · 363 words

S.S. Sudhalkar, J.

1.

This is an application for the cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the respondents No. 3 and 4 by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala.

2.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed affidavit of Manjit Kaur. He has also vehemently argued that anticipatory bail should not have been granted as the matter is a serious one and that it is a case arising from the FIR regarding theft of ornaments and if anticipatory bail is granted, the ornaments will not be recovered. He has also argued that the complainant had to send reminders for getting the FIR registered because the police was not registering the case. As against this, learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab has stated that the police found no case against the private respondents and made a report for discharge of the accused and the learned Judicial Magistrate had granted the request of the police. He has produced the photocopy of the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the order of the learned Magistrate is not proper. However, at present while dealing with this application for cancellation of bail, this question is not required to be considered. From the facts as such, when the police had filed a report for discharge of the accused and the learned Magistrate had accepted it, no useful purpose will be served by cancellation of anticipatory bail.

4.

Regarding the arguments of the petitioner that the ornaments will not be recovered if anticipatory bail is accepted, it can be seen that the said argument is misconceived. Granting of anticipatory bail in no way acts as a deterrent against the granting of police remand if the concerned Judicial Magistrate finds it proper to grant the same. even if no such clarification is mentioned in the anticipatory bail order, remand can be granted by a Magistrate in spite of the order of anticipatory bail. Only the condition requisite is that he should be satisfied for granting of remand.

5.

In view of the above position, the application for cancellation of bail is without merits and is dismissed.