Narender vs State Of Haryana on 16 November, 2017

CRM-M-42692-2017 -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH

CRM-M-42692-2017 (OM)
Date of decision : 16.11.2017

Narender
…Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana
…Respondent

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN

Present: Mr. Sushil Gautam, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Mahima Yashpal, AAG, Haryana,
assisted by ASI Brijpal.

JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. (Oral)

The instant petition has been preferred under Section 439

Cr.P.C. seeking bail in FIR No.381 dated 25.07.2017, registered under

Sections 376 (added subsequently), 354 (deleted subsequently), 377, 406,

498-A and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, at Police

Station Rai, Sonipat.

Contends that the petitioner is the brother-in-law (devar) of the

complainant, who has roped in the whole family. There is a delay of more

than five months in lodging the FIR. She has also levelled allegations

attracting Section 377 IPC against her husband, however, the same is not

supported by the medical evidence.

On the other hand, learned State counsel has opposed the

instant petition. On instructions, learned State counsel submits that the

petitioner has been specifically named in the FIR and statement of the

prosecutrix under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and has been ascribed specific role.

She further states that the challan stands presented and the matter is now

fixed for framing of charge.

1 of 2
17-11-2017 05:36:16 :::
CRM-M-42692-2017 -2-

Heard.

The petitioner is in custody since 05.09.2017. The charges are

yet to be framed, therefore, it can safely be inferred that the conclusion of

trial may take time.

In view of the above, without adverting to the merits of the

instant case, this petition is allowed. The petitioner be admitted to bail

during the pendency of the trial, on furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds,

to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty

Magistrate, concerned.

However, anything noticed hereinabove shall not be construed

as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

16.11.2017 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN)
atulsethi JUDGE

Whether speaking / reasoned : Yes No

Whether Reportable : Yes No

2 of 2
17-11-2017 05:36:17 :::

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *