Skip to content


Present: Mr. S.S.Dinarpur Advocate Vs. State of Haryana - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation

Court

Punjab and Haryana High Court

Decided On

Appellant

Present: Mr. S.S.Dinarpur Advocate

Respondent

State of Haryana

Excerpt:


.....since 8.6.2013 and ready to face trial in accordance with law. counsel for the state assisted by counsel for the complainant has not disputed factual assertions and fair enough to concede that the petitioner has been implicated in the crime in view of disclosure statement made by accused bijender son of mai dhan during his custodial interrogation by the police. i have heard counsel for the parties and perused the case file. as per statement allegedly made by bijender singh during his police custody, no overt role has been attributed to the petitioner either exhorting his co-accused or causing injuries to the victims who lost their saini paramjit kaur 2014.03.06 16:16 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh crl. misc. m-38952 of 2013 -3- lives. there is nothing on record to suggest that the petitioner had any hostility much less axe to grind against the deceased or their family members.challan has been presented in the court and conclusion of the trial is likely to take its own time. there is no such allegation against the petitioner that he is likely to tamper with the prosecution evidence much less flee from process of justice in case enlarged.....

Judgment:


Crl.

Misc.

M-38952 of 2013 -1- In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Crl.

Misc.

M-38952 of 2013 Date of Decision: March 04, 2014 Mohit ---Petitioner versus State of Haryana ---Respondent Coram: Hon'ble MRS.Justice Rekha Mittal Present: Mr.S.S.Dinarpur, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.Anupam Sharma, AAG, Haryana for respondent-State.

Mr.Navneet Singh, Advocate for the complainant.

*** 1.

Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?.

2.

To be referred to the Reporter or not?.

3.

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?.

*** REKHA MITTAL, J.

Prayer in the present petition is for grant of regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short “the Code”.)for offence registered vide FIR No.190 dated 26.5.2013 punishable under Sections 148, 364, 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25 and 27 of the Arms Act in Police Station, Ganaur, District Sanepat.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not named in the FIR which is otherwise not based upon an eye witness account Saini Paramjit Kaur 2014.03.06 16:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Crl.

Misc.

M-38952 of 2013 -2- of the occurrence.

No recovery has been effected from the petitioner during investigation.

No specific role has been attributed to him and the petitioner does not belong to the village of the deceased and the complainant.

Only evidence relied upon by the prosecution to indict the petitioner in the crime is the disclosure statement made by one of the co-accused namely Bijender Singh during his police custody, which is not admissible in evidence.

According to counsel, as per the said statement purported to be made by Bijender, no overt act has been attributed to the petitioner and merely his presence has been shown in the vehicle in which one of the victiMs.Surender, was carried and brought to the village, where the occurrence statedly took place resulting in sustaining of injuries by Surender and Satyawan with firearms used by Bijender and another (non-applicants) resulting in death of said Surender and Satyawan.

The petitioner had no motive to join hands with the assailants to cause harm to Surender and Satyawan and he is in custody since 8.6.2013 and ready to face trial in accordance with law.

Counsel for the State assisted by counsel for the complainant has not disputed factual assertions and fair enough to concede that the petitioner has been implicated in the crime in view of disclosure statement made by accused Bijender son of Mai Dhan during his custodial interrogation by the police.

I have heard counsel for the parties and perused the case file.

As per statement allegedly made by Bijender Singh during his police custody, no overt role has been attributed to the petitioner either exhorting his co-accused or causing injuries to the victims who lost their Saini Paramjit Kaur 2014.03.06 16:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Crl.

Misc.

M-38952 of 2013 -3- lives.

There is nothing on record to suggest that the petitioner had any hostility much less axe to grind against the deceased or their family membeRs.Challan has been presented in the Court and conclusion of the trial is likely to take its own time.

There is no such allegation against the petitioner that he is likely to tamper with the prosecution evidence much less flee from process of justice in case enlarged on bail.

Without meaning to express any opinion on merits of the controversy, bail to the petitioner on his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the trial court/Sessions Judge.

However, he shall abide by the following conditions:- (i) he shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; and (ii) he shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.

(REKHA MITTAL) JUDGE March 04, 2014 PARAMJIT Saini Paramjit Kaur 2014.03.06 16:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //