Recovery Of Excess Payment Made By Mistake Is Permissible When Employee Furnished An Undertaking To Refund: Supreme Court Anticipatory Bail Application Under Sec 482 BNSS Is Maintainable Even If No Formal Order Of Arrest Is Passed By CGST Authorities: Allahabad High Court Consensual Physical Relationship Following Three-Year Courtship Does Not Amount To Rape If Marriage Promise Fails: Supreme Court Criminalization Of Civil Disputes | Courts Must Not Engage In Speculative Reasoning While Dealing With Quashing Petitions Under Section 482 CrPC: Supreme Court Mere Recovery Of Tainted Money In The Absence Of Proof Of Demand Is Insufficient To Sustain Conviction Under Section 7 And 13 PC Act: Supreme Court High Court Cannot Quash NDPS Proceedings Merely Relying On Jurisprudence Regarding Evidentiary Value Of Confessional Statements: Supreme Court Extra-Judicial Confession Made While In Police Custody Is Inadmissible In Evidence: Supreme Court Taxing Authorities Must Levy Tax Based On The Form Of Goods At The Time Of Sale, Not On Potential End Use: Supreme Court Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders CBI Probe Into State Corruption Scams After Punjab Police Fails To Act On ED’s Section 66(2) PMLA Referral Section 482 CrPC | FIR Based On Consensual Relationship Gone Sour Cannot Be Sustained To Coerce Marriage: Supreme Court CISF Personnel Soliciting Bribes For Employment Is Guilty Of 'Gross Misconduct' Under Section 18 CISF Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court PIL | State Cannot Use Demolition Powers To Silence Whistleblowers Or Deflect Accountability: Punjab & Haryana High Court Criminal Proceedings Against In-Laws Without Specific Allegations Of Overt Acts Constitute Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court Order 22 Rule 9 CPC | Admission In An Abated Suit Does Not Constitute Estoppel Against Landlord In A Fresh Eviction Proceeding: Calcutta High Court Arbitral Award Cannot Be Set Aside For Non-Adjudication Of Claims Specifically Abandoned By Parties: Delhi High Court Mere Long Possession Is Not Adverse Possession; Defendant Must Prove Hostile Animus To Deny Title Of True Owner: Himachal Pradesh High Court Reopening Of Assessment Under Sec 148A(d) Income Tax Act Cannot Be Based On 'Change Of Opinion' Without Fresh Tangible Material: Gujarat High Court Municipal Authorities Must Initiate Formal Proceedings And Grant Opportunity Of Hearing Before Sealing Premises:  Jharkhand High Court Court Cannot Compel Third-Party To Undergo DNA Test Unless Necessary For Just Adjudication: Madhya Pradesh High Court Trial Court Cannot Defer Bail Application Merely Because A Transfer Petition Is Pending In High Court: Punjab & Haryana High Court Section 108 BNS | Mere Taunts Or Harassment Regarding Not Bearing A Male Child Do Not Constitute Abetment To Suicide: Rajasthan High Court Daily-Wage Employees Treated As Permanent Under 1988 Government Resolution Entitled To Annual Increment Benefits: Supreme Court

Punjab and Haryana High Court Grants Bail in Retaliatory FIR, Citing Dubious Conduct of Complainant

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling on October 20, 2023, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, in a bail application, granted bail to the petitioner who had been languishing in custody. The judgment shed light on the alleged retaliatory nature of the FIR and raised questions about the complainant's conduct.

The judgment noted, "There appears to be an orchestrated attempt on the part of the complainant in collusion with certain officials, be it out of vengeance or otherwise, to keep filing one FIR after another to somehow keep the petitioner in custody."

The petitioner had been arrested in connection with an FIR registered under Sections 327, 323, 294, 506, 120-B, 384 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, with the later addition of Section 201 IPC. The allegations against the petitioner included a conspiracy and torture by police officials.

The court observed that the petitioner's continued preventive custody was based on an unsubstantiated suspicion that he might tamper with evidence or influence witnesses. However, it pointed out, "There is no probability of tampering with evidence as it has already been seized by the investigating agency."

The judgment further highlighted that the petitioner had been in detention for over three months and that his co-accused had already been granted interim anticipatory bail.

The court concluded, "No useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in further preventive custody," and ordered his release on bail.

This ruling not only provides relief to the petitioner but also raises questions about the filing of retaliatory FIRs and the need for a thorough investigation into such cases.

Date of decision: October 20, 2023

Ashish Kapoor VS State of Punjab   

Latest Legal News