SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(P&H) 1856

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
P.B. BAJANTHRI, J.
KULBIR SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA – Respondent
CRM-M No. 28905 of 2018 (O&M)
Decided on : 20-07-2018

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :S.S.Jattan, Advocate
For the Respondent: R.K. Doon, AAG, Haryana

Headnote:

Haryana Good Conduct Prisoner (Temporary Release) Act, 1988, S.8 & 9--Anticipatory Bail--Absconding of Prisoner--Contention that petitioner had rented out an accommodation to the mother of the said convict thus petitioner hatched the conspiracy--Held; No specific role is attributed to petitioner in FIR, even prosecution failed to establish case for custodial interrogation--Bail granted--Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.438. (Para 5)

JUDGMENT :

P.B. BAJANTHRI, J.

1. In the present petition, petitioner seeks anticipatory bail under the provision of Section 438 Cr.P.C., 1973 in case FIR No. 116 dated 10.06.2018 under section 8, 9 of The Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1988 and Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of IPC registered at Police Station Bilaspur, District Yamuna Nagar.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner has no role to play in the absconding of convict namely Sanjeev who was undergoing life imprisonment after conviction. It was further argued that the petitioner-accused is ready to join the investigation. Even the co-accused Jasmer Singh allowed the concession of interim bail. In terms of the order dated 12.07.2018 passed in CRM-M-28061-2018 titled as Jasmer Singh v. State of Haryana. Petitioner is also entitled to relief of anticipatory bail.

3. While resisting the claim of the petitioner learned State counsel submitted on instructions of ASI Mehroof Ali that he is required for interrogation. The petitioner had rented out an accommodation to the mother of the said convict and thereby, the petitioner hatched the conspiracy for getting released the said convict on 'Furlough' and also helped him in his absconding.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

5. As the co-accused has been allowed concession of interim bail and no specific role is attributed to the petitioner in FIR, even prosecution failed to establish case for custodial interrogation, therefore petitioner is granted relief of anticipatory bail. Petition stands allowed, subject to the condition of paras 6 and 7.

6. Petitioner shall also deposit a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate as surety amount. Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer and join the investigation.

7. In the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on interim bail on his furnishing bail bond to the satisfaction of the Arresting/Investigating Officer. He will remain bound by the conditions envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.



Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top