Judgment:
CRM-M No.11628 of 2014 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.11628 of 2014.
Date of Decision : 29.05.2014.
Sajid ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ...Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA.
Present: Mr.Virender Soni, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr.Vikas Malik, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana.
*** Tejinder Singh Dhindsa, J.
(Oral) This order shall dispose of the present petition preferred under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking the benefit of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.04 dated 05.01.2014, under Sections 307/427/34 of IPC, 25 of the Arms Act and Sections 2/80, 4-A/8 of the Co.Slaughter Act, registered at Police Station Meham, District Rohtak.
The present FIR has been registered on the statement of Sunil Jangra.
It was alleged that on 5.1.2014 the complainant along with certain other companions i.e.Co.Protectors had received information that the petitioner along with co-accused and all Muslim by caste and residents of Baghpat (UP) were taken Co.meat after slaughtering the cows in a canter (red colour) and one Indica car was also moving in front as pilot.
It is further alleged that on receipt of secret information a Gherabandi was Kanchan 2014.06.02 12:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M No.11628 of 2014 2 done and at that time an attempt to run over the complainant and his companions with an intention to kill was made and even shots were fired upon them.
Counsel for the parties have been heard.
Investigation in the case is complete and the challan has been presented on 4.3.2014.
The petitioner has been in custody since 5.1.2014.
Even otherwise, it would be apposite to notice that the complainant i.e.Sunil and companions having received certain secret information chose to intercept the vehicles as also alleged accused on their own and did not pass the requisite information to the police agency.
That apart, it has gone undisputed that no injury has been suffered by any of the complainants and even a fire arm had been recovered from the adjacent fields and not from the person of any of the accused.
The bail application preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed by the Court below by observing that a pistol and dagger that were allegedly used in the occurrence were recovered from the present petitioner.
On the last date of hearing i.e.on 6.5.2014, counsel for the petitioner had seriously contested such assertion.
Accordingly, the matter had been adjourned for today and the State counsel had been directed to complete instructions as regards recovery, if any, that had been effected from the present petitioner.
Learned State counsel upon instructions from ASI Harbhaj would concede that no pistol or daggar had been recovered from the present petitioner and rather it was only a Kanchan 2014.06.02 12:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M No.11628 of 2014 3 Reti had been recovered.
The offence under the Co.Slaughter Act is triable by a Court of Magistrate.
In so far as, offence under Section 307 IPC is concerned, in the facts of the present case the same would be a moot point, to be adjudicated upon during the couRs.of trial.
The trial itself is at very initial stage and shall take time to complete.
In the totality of circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner is entitled to the concession of regular bail.
Petition allowed.
Bail to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate.
Disposed of.
May 29, 2014.
(TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA) kanchan JUDGE Kanchan 2014.06.02 12:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh