Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(P&H) 891

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Manjari Nehru Kaul, J.
Rohit - Petitioner - Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab - Respondent - Respondent
CRM-M No.16623 of 2023
Decided On : 28-11-2023

Advocates appeared:
Ms. Harmeet K. Chanan, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Kanica Sachdeva, Asst. Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent/State.

Compliance with investigation and cooperation with the investigating agency are crucial factors in granting concession of bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

Headnote:
Bail - Section 438 Cr.P.C. - Concession of Bail
Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought the concession of bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a case registered under Sections 306/34 of the IPC. The petitioner contended that the deceased had felt humiliated and ended his life, and the ingredient to attract the mischief of Section 306/107 of the IPC was not made out.
Finding of the Court:

The Court granted the concession of interim bail to the petitioner, noting that the petitioner had joined investigation and cooperated with the investigating agency. The State counsel did not dispute the fact of the petitioner having joined investigation and cooperated with the investigating agency.
Issues: Concession of bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C., compliance with investigation, and cooperation with the investigating agency.
Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the petitioner had complied with the order to join investigation and cooperate with the investigating agency, and that the State counsel did not require the petitioner for further investigation or custodial interrogation.
Final Decision: The petition was allowed, and the interim order granting bail was made absolute, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. The State was given the liberty to seek cancellation of the bail if the petitioner misused the concession of bail.

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J.

1. The petitioner is seeking the concession of bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in case FIR No.25 dated 11.03.2023 under Sections 306/34 of the IPC registered at Police Station Division No.5 District Jalandhar.

2. On 12.07.2023, while noticing the following submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court had granted the concession of interim bail to the petitioner and asked him to join investigation.

“Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that a criminal case had been registered against the deceased under Section 377 of the IPC and allegedly on account of the deceased having felt humiliated he ended his life by consuming poison. It thus leaves no manner of doubt that the ingredient to attract the mischief of Section 306/107 of the IPC is not made out. She further submits that the petitioner is ready to join investigation and cooperate with the investigating agency.”

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of the order dated 12.07.2023, the petitioner has joined investigation and cooperated with the investigating agency.

4. Learned State counsel, on instructions, does not dispute the factum of the petitioner having joined investigation and cooperated with the investigating agency. She, on further instructions, submits that the petitioner is not required for further investigation much less for his custodial interrogation.

5. In the circumstances, the petition is allowed and the interim order dated 12.07.2023 is made absolute subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. Needless to say, in case the petitioner misuses the concession of bail granted to him, the State would be at liberty to seek cancellation of the bail granted to him.

Petition allowed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document