Gratuity Is a Property Right, Not a Charity: MP High Court Upholds Gratuity Claims of Long-Term Contract Workers Seized Vehicles Must Not Be Left to Rot in Open Yards: Madras High Court Invokes Article 21, Orders Release of Vehicle Seized in Illegal Quarrying Case Even After Talaq And A Settlement, A Divorced Muslim Woman Can Claim Maintenance Under Section 125 CRPC: Kerala High Court Bail Cannot Be Withheld as Punishment: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail to Govt Official in ₹200 Cr. Scholarship Scam Citing Delay and Article 21 Violation Custodial Interrogation Necessary in Serious Economic Offences: Delhi High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail in ₹1.91 Cr Housing Scam Specific Relief Act | Readiness and Willingness Must Be Real and Continuous — Plaintiffs Cannot Withhold Funds and Blame the Seller: Bombay High Court Even If Claim Is Styled Under Section 163A, It Can Be Treated Under Section 166 If Negligence Is Pleaded And Higher Compensation Is Claimed: Supreme Court When Cheating Flows from One Criminal Conspiracy, the Law Does Not Demand 1852 FIRs: Supreme Court Upholds Single FIR in Multi-Crore Cheating Case Initiating Multiple FIRs on Same Facts is Impermissible: Supreme Court Quashes Parallel FIRs and Grants Bail Protection in Refund Case Not Every Middleman Is a Trafficker: Gujarat High Court Grants Bail in International Cyber Trafficking Case, Cites Absence of Mens Rea Stay in One Corner Freezes the Whole Map: Madras High Court Upholds Validity of Decades-Old Land Acquisition Despite 11-Year Delay in Award Parole Once Granted Cannot Be Made Illusory by Imposing Impossible Conditions: Rajasthan High Court Declares Mechanical Surety Requirement for Indigent Convicts Unconstitutional Once Acquisition Is Complete, Title Disputes Fall Outside Civil Court Jurisdiction: Madhya Pradesh High Court No Appeal Lies Against Lok Adalat Compromise Decree Even on Grounds of Fraud: Orissa High Court Declares First Appeal Not Maintainable Sanction to Prosecute Under UAPA Cannot Be a Mechanical Act: Supreme Court Quashes Jharkhand Government’s Third-Time Sanction Without New Evidence FIRs in Corruption Cases Cannot Be Quashed on Hyper-Technical Grounds of Police Station Jurisdiction: Supreme Court Restores ACB Investigations Quashed by Andhra Pradesh High Court Mere Completion of Ayurvedic Nursing Training Does Not Confer Right to Appointment: Supreme Court Rejects Legitimate Expectation Claim by Trainees University’s Error Can’t Cost a Student Her Future: Supreme Court Directs Manav Bharti University to Issue Withheld Degree and Marksheets Due to Clerical Mistake Disciplinary Exoneration Cannot Shield Public Servant from Criminal Trial in Corruption Cases: Supreme Court Customs Tariff Act | ‘End Use’ and ‘Common Parlance’ Tests Cannot Override Statutory Context: Supreme Court Classifies Mushroom Shelves as ‘Aluminium Structures’ Supreme Court Allows PIL Against Limited Maternity Benefits for Adoptive Mothers to Continue Under New Social Security Code Liberty Cannot Wait for Endless Trials: Supreme Court Grants Bail to Wadhawan Brothers in ₹57,000 Crore DHFL Scam Co-Sharer Has Superior Right of Pre-emption Even If Land Is Gair Mumkin Bara: Punjab & Haryana High Court Neighbours Cannot Be Prosecuted Under Section 498A IPC Merely For Alleged Instigation: Karnataka High Court No Party Has a Right to Demand a Local Commissioner — It's Purely the Court’s Discretion: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses Civil Revision

Punjab and Haryana High Court Dismisses Contempt Petition Alleging Willful Disobedience of Anticipatory Bail Order

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed a contempt petition filed by Vinod Hastir against Balkar Singh and others, alleging willful disobedience of an order granting anticipatory bail. The judgment was delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arvind Singh Sangwan on 19th July 2023.

The petitioner, Vinod Hastir, had sought anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No.16 dated 23.01.2019 under Sections 406, 420, and 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Navi Baradari, Jalandhar, District Jalandhar. Subsequently, during the investigation, the police added charges under Sections 465, 467, 468, and 471 IPC, alleging the production of forged documents by the petitioner.

Counsel for the petitioner argued that the arrest and subsequent bail were in violation of a previous judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. However, the respondents contended that proper procedure had been followed and the arrest was necessary for completing the investigation.

In the judgment, Justice Arvind Singh Sangwan observed, “Considering the fact that the petitioner himself has initially filed CRM-12226-2020 and CRM-18802-2020 in CRM-M-9545-2019 for grant of bail, which were dismissed as withdrawn on 25.01.2021, and even subsequently, the petitioner filed second petition i.e. CRM-M-5437-2021 for granted for anticipatory bail and the same was rendered as infructuous on 05.02.2021, in view of the statement that the petitioner stands arrested on 30.01.2021 and was granted the concession of bail vide order dated 04.02.2021, this Court finds no willful disobedience of the order.”

The Court further emphasized that the respondents did not intentionally or willfully disobey the court order and the arrest was made to facilitate the effective investigation.

Punjab and Haryana High Court ruled that there was no willful disobedience of the court order, and the contempt petition was dismissed.

Date of Decision: 19th July 2023

Vinod Hastir    vs Balkar Singh and others   

Latest Legal News