Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 80102 (PNJ)

GURSIWRAN SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS

CRM-M/45761/2024 · 2025-09-08

Manjari Nehru Kaul

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 214 CRM-M-45761-2024 Date of decision: 08.09.2005 Gursiwran Singh .....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL Present : Mr. Harpreet Singh Puri, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Rana, Sr. DAG, Punjab. Mr. Piyush Sharma, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3. **** MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL) 1. The petitioner is seeking the cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to respondents No.2 and 3-accused vide order dated 15.03.2023 and 21.03.2023 (Annexures P-2 and P-3 respectively) passed by learned Sessions Judge, Ferozepur, in case FIR No.0033 dated 24.02.2023 under Sections 420 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered at Police Station Zira, District Ferozepur. 2. On being pointedly asked as to why the petitioner- complainant was seeking cancellation of bail grated to respondents No.2 and 3-accused, it has been submitted that although there has been no specific instance of the accused misusing the concession of bail or breaching any conditions, however, there is a genuine apprehension that like co-accused Gulshanpreet Kaur who had since fled the country VINAY 2025.09.09 10:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CRM-M-45761-2024 and had been declared a proclaimed offender, the respondents/accused would also follow suit. 3. Learned counsel for respondents No.2 and 3-accused, however, vehemently opposed the prayer and controverted the apprehension raised by the counsel for the petitioner-complainant. It has been submitted that respondents No.2 and 3 have no such plans of travelling abroad. However, he undertakes that in case respondents No.2 and 3 plan to go abroad, they would seek prior permission of the learned Trial Court for the same. 4. The instant petition is disposed of in view of the undertaking given by learned counsel for respondents No.2 and 3- accused in the Court today. 08.09.2005 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Vinay JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No VINAY 2025.09.09 10:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment