SUKHWINDER SINGH ALIAS SUKHA v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER
CRM-M/20907/2025 · 2025-05-22
Sanjiv Berry
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 47757 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 47757 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
224
CRM-M-20907-2025 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-20907-2025 Date of decision: 22.05.2025
SUKHWINDER SINGH ALIAS SUKHA ….Petitioner
Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER ....Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY Present:- Mr. Gaurav Kalsi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Roshandeep Singh, AAG Punjab. None for the complainant. ..… SANJIV BERRY, J. (ORAL) By way of present petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR as under: - FIR No. Dated Sections Police Station 113 03.07.2024 384, 506, 120-B IPC (Sections 387, 364-A, 392 IPC added later on) Civil Lines, Amritsar, Police Commissionerate Amritsar.
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance to the order dated 28.04.2025, the petitioner has joined the investigation.
3. During the course of hearing on 28.04.2025, following order had been passed: -
“
2. It is, inter alia, contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner having no concern with the alleged occurrence has been wrongly named as accused in Puneet Sharma 2025.05.23 16:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment
224
CRM-M-20907-2025 -2- the FIR. He contends that no specific overt act is attributed to the petitioner.
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further contends that the petitioner is not having any criminal antecedents and even during the course of proceedings the matter has been settled vide compromise (Annexure P-1) dated
03.12.2024. He further contends that the petitioner is ready to join the investigation and seeks concession of anticipatory bail. 4. Notice of motion. 5. On the asking of the Court, Mr. Rajinder Singh Bhatta, DAG Punjab, present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of the State-respondent and prays for time to file the status report/reply, if any, in the matter. 6. Mr. Bhupinder Gupta, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant-respondent No.2 and has filed his memo of appearance. The same is taken on record. He has categorically stated that he has specific instructions from respondent No.2 to say that the matter has been compromised voluntarily between the parties and the respondent No.2 has no objection if bail is granted to the petitioner. 7. Be it the case, without commenting on the merits, the petitioner is hereby directed to join investigation within seven days from today and in the event of his arrest, he is ordered to be released on interim bail on his furnishing personal/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer. He shall also abide by conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS. 8. List on 13.05.2025.”
4. Learned State counsel on instructions received from Investigating Officer of the case informs the Court that the petitioner has joined the investigation and is neither required for further investigation nor for any custodial interrogation. 5. Keeping in view the above submissions made by learned State counsel and the fact that the petitioner had joined the investigation Puneet Sharma 2025.05.23 16:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment
224
CRM-M-20907-2025 -3- consequent to the order dated 28.04.2025 passed by this Court, interim bail granted vide order dated 28.04.2025 is hereby confirmed, subject to conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS. Further the petitioner is directed to join investigation as and when required in future by way of written notice for such purpose to be served by Investigating Officer of this case upon the petitioner; he will not tamper with the evidence nor will influence the witnesses and will not leave the country without prior permission of the Court. 6. The petition stands allowed. 7.
It is made clear that anything contained hereinabove shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. (SANJIV BERRY) 22.05.2025 JUDGE puneet i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No ii) Whether reportable? Yes/No Puneet Sharma 2025.05.23 16:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment