Punjab And Haryana High Court · 2012
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
The petition stands disposed of accordingly
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ss. 438, 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 34, 307, 323, 324, 341
Judgment
Operative part
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr. Arvind Thakur, for the petitioner. Mr. Luvinder Sofat, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Vivek Goel, Advocate for the complainant. JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. (Oral) The petitioner has approached this Court under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, 'Cr.P.C.') for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.88 dated 05.06.2012, registered under Sections 323, 324, 341, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 307 IPC (added subsequently), registered at Police Station Bullowal, District Hoshiarpur. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner was earlier admitted to bail under Sections 323, 324, 341 IPC. On instructions from ASI Gobinder Singh, the learned State CRM No.M-30059 of 2012 (O&M) -2- counsel states that the petitioner did not misuse the concession of bail. He further states that in pursuance of the order dated 26.09.2012, passed by this Court, the petitioner has again appeared, and the recovery has been effected. He is not required for further custodial interrogation. The learned counsel for the complainant states that the petitioner has caused injury on the back of the injured-complainant. In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the interim bail granted by this Court vide order dated 26.09.2012, is made absolute, subject to the conditions contained in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. The petition stands disposed of accordingly.
18.10.2012 atulsethi (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) JUDGE Note : Whether to be referred to the reporter ? Yes / No.
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The petition stands disposed of accordingly
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — ss. 438, 438(2); Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 34, 307, 323, 324, 341.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 18 Oct 2012. The bench was JITENDRA CHAUHAN.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.