Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 1532 (PNJ)

Gurpreet Singh v. State of Punjab

2012-10-19

RAM CHAND GUPTA

body2012
JUDGMENT Mr. Ram Chand Gupta, J.: (Oral) - The present petition has been filed for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure in FIR no.72 dated 27.07.2012, under Section 379 IPC and Section 3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, registered at police station Kot Ishe Khan, District Moga. 2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record including the impugned order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Moga dismissing anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner. 3. This Court while issuing notice of motion on 21.09.2012 passed the following order:- “CRM No.56774 of 2012 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. CRM No.M-29581 of 2012 Contends that Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat was inimical towards petitioner as he had sought information under the Right to Information Act against irregularities being committed by real nephew of Sarpanch of village in running the ration depot and hence, just to pressurize the petitioner, the present FIR has been lodged against him. Further contends that his father has also been involved in this case and however, he has already been arrested and released on regular bail. Notice of motion to Advocate General, Punjab for 19.10.2012. However, in the meantime, petitioner is directed to join the investigation and in case of his arrest, he shall be released on interim bail to the satisfaction of the arresting officer subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.” 4. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has already joined the investigation pursuant to said order dated 21.09.2012. 5. It has also been stated by learned counsel for the State that petitioner has joined the investigation and that he is no more required for any custodial interrogation. 6. There are no allegations on behalf of the State that petitioner is likely to abscond or that he is likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts in the Court, if released on bail. 7. Hence, in view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of Gurpeet Singh is accepted and order dated 21.09.2012 granting interim bail in favour of the petitioner is, hereby, made absolute subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. 8. 7. Hence, in view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of Gurpeet Singh is accepted and order dated 21.09.2012 granting interim bail in favour of the petitioner is, hereby, made absolute subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. 8. The present petition stands disposed of accordingly.