Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Pardeep and Another Vs. State of Haryana

Pardeep and Another vs State of Haryana

Type Court Judgment Court Punjab and Haryana Decided Jul 14, 2014
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1155987

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Punjab and Haryana High Court
Decided On
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Pardeep and Another

Respondent

State of Haryana

Excerpt

.....alongwith pawan had caused injuries to randhir singh and inder as a result of which they had died. learned counsel for the petitioners submits that during the investigation of the case, both the petitioners criminal misc. no.m-17370 of 2014 -2- were found innocent. their names were placed in column no.2 of the challan, which was presented only against pawan. subsequently, when the statements of complainant balbir and bani singh were recorded, an application was moved by the prosecution under section 319 cr.p.c., pursuant to which, both the petitioners were summoned as additional accused. learned state counsel has opposed the prayer by submitting that the case involves the commission of double murder and pardeep-petitioner, alongwith his co-accused pawan had given injuries with bricks and stones to the two deceased persons. the trial of the case is likely to take a long time. no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioners behind the bars.resultantly, the petition is accepted. bail to the satisfaction of chief judicial magistrate/duty magistrate, sonepat. ( t.p.s.mann ) july 14, 2014 judge satish satish kumar 2014.07.16 16:43 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc.

No.M-17370 of 2014 Date of Decision : July 14, 2014 Pardeep and another .....Petitioners VERSUS State of Haryana .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE T.P.S.MANN Present : Mr.Bijender Dhankhar, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr.Raja Sharma, Assistant A.G., Haryana.

T.P.S.MANN, J.

(Oral) The petitioners have filed the present petition for grant of bail during the pendency of the trial of the case emanating from FIR No.270 dated 11.7.2012 under Sections 302/34 IPC registered at Police Station Ganaur, District Sonepat.

Earlier to filing the present petition, Sonu @ Sandeep-petitioner had moved this Court for the grant of regular bail but the said application was dismissed as having been withdrawn on 11.11.2013.

However, qua Pardeep- petitioner it is the fiRs.application.

As per the prosecution, Sonu @ Sandeep- petitioner was said to have taken Randhir Singh in his grip, while Pardeep-petitioner, alongwith Pawan had caused injuries to Randhir Singh and Inder as a result of which they had died.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that during the investigation of the case, both the petitioners Criminal Misc.

No.M-17370 of 2014 -2- were found innocent.

Their names were placed in column No.2 of the challan, which was presented only against Pawan.

Subsequently, when the statements of complainant Balbir and Bani Singh were recorded, an application was moved by the prosecution under Section 319 Cr.P.C., pursuant to which, both the petitioners were summoned as additional accused.

Learned State counsel has opposed the prayer by submitting that the case involves the commission of double murder and Pardeep-petitioner, alongwith his co-accused Pawan had given injuries with bricks and stones to the two deceased persons.

The trial of the case is likely to take a long time.

No useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioners behind the baRs.Resultantly, the petition is accepted.

Bail to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, Sonepat.

( T.P.S.MANN ) July 14, 2014 JUDGE satish Satish Kumar 2014.07.16 16:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial