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

2022 Supreme(P&H) 1370

ANOOP CHITKARA
Manjeet Singh Malhi – Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Amrit Singh Kang, Advocate, Harsimar Singh Sitta, Advocate, S.S. Nagra, Advocate

JUDGMENT

Anoop Chitkara, J.

FIR No.

Dated

Police Station

Sections

102

27.07.2022

Sultanwind, District Police Commissionerate Amritsar

420, 120-B, IPC

1. The petitioner apprehending arrest in the FIR captioned above, on the allegations of cheating, has come up before this Court under Section 438 CrPC seeking anticipatory bail.

2. In paragraph 13 of the bail petition, the accused declares that he has no criminal antecedents.

3. Petitioner's counsel argued that the custodial investigation would serve no purpose whatsoever, and the pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and family. Petitioners counsel further submits that a compromise has been effected between the parties .

4. State counsel does not dispute the fact of compromise. Complainant's counsel has no objection if petitioner is granted bail.

REASONING:

5. The allegations against the petitioner are that he along with other co accused cheated the complainant by taking Rs 9 lacs and gold ornaments in order to settle the family dispute . Given the penal provisions imposed and th

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    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 telegram-icon
    whatsapp-icon Back to top