SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Dharambir vs State Of Haryana on 29 January, 2018

Crl. Misc. No. M-29561 of 2017 [ 1 ]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH

Crl. Misc. No. M-29561 of 2017
Date of Decision : January 29, 2018

Dharambir …………………………………………………….Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana……………………………………………. Respondent

CORAM : HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL

Present: Mr. Robin Singh Hooda, Advocate
for the petitioner.

Mr. Anmol Malik, AAG, Haryana.

LISA GILL, J. (Oral)

Petitioner seeks the concession of bail pending trial in FIR No.

266 dated 01.06.2017 under Sections 376, 506, 511 IPC registered at Police

Station Kharkhoda, District Sonepat.

Following order was passed on 09.01.2018:-

“The petitioner seeks the concession of bail pending trial in

FIR No. 266 dated 01.06.2017. It is submitted that initially FIR

under Sections 354, 506 IPC was registered. Section 376 read

with Section 511 IPC was added on the basis of statement of

the prosecutrix under Section 164 Cr.P.C.

It is vehemently argued that the petitioner has been falsely

implicated due to an altercation which took place between the

petitioner and the husband of the victim. On an earlier

occasion the petitioner was beaten up by the husband of the

prosecutrix. He was shifted to the Civil Hospital, Sonepat, and

1 of 3
12-02-2018 01:30:21 :::
Crl. Misc. No. M-29561 of 2017 [ 2 ]

thereafter referred to the PGI MS, Rohtak. A complaint was

made by the petitioner but no action was taken by the police

authorities. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been

in custody since 21.06.2017. He is not involved in any other

criminal case. Moreover, the victim and her husband have not

come forward to depose before the trial Court and now

bailable warrants have been issued to secure their presence.

Learned counsel for the State prays for some time to verify

whether the petitioner was ever admitted at Civil Hospital,

Sonepat, or referred to PGI MS, Rohtak.

List on 29.01.2018.”

Learned counsel for the State,, on instructions from HC

Sandeep Kumar, verifies that a medical report in respect of medical

examination of the petitioner conducted on 29.05.2017 at Civil Hospital,

Kharkhoda, Sonepat is available on the police file. It is further informed that

the victim and her husband did not come forward to depose before the

learned trial Court despite issuance of summons. Now bailable warrants

have been issued to secure their presence. As per status report by way of an

affidavit dated 04.10.2017 of DSP Kharkhoda, Sonepat it is mentioned that

earlier FIR No. 553 dated 12.12.2016 under Section 354 IPC was registered

at Police Station Kharkhoda, Sonepat against Sandeep son of Rajinder

Singh, a cousin brother of the petitioner, on the basis of a statement made by

the present complainant. Cancellation report was prepared in the said

matter. However in the subsequent para of affidavit dated 04.10.2017 it is

mentioned that the real brother of the petitioner disclosed that there was no

dispute between the families.

2 of 3
12-02-2018 01:30:22 :::
Crl. Misc. No. M-29561 of 2017 [ 3 ]

FIR No. 553 dated 12.12.2016 as well as the medico-legal

report dated 29.05.2017 is available on the police file. It is verified by

learned counsel for the State, on instructions from HC Sandeep Kumar, that

the petitioner is not involved in any other criminal case. There are no

allegations that the petitioner is likely to abscond or that he is likely to

dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts in the Court, if released on

bail. Trial of the case is not likely to conclude in the near future. No useful

purpose shall be served by keeping the petitioner incarcerated any longer.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case noted

above but without expressing any opinion on the merits of case, it is

considered just and expedient to allow this petition.

Consequently, the petitioner be released on bail pending trial

subject to his furnishing requisite bail bonds and surety to the satisfaction

of the learned trial Court.

None of the observations made here-in-above shall be

construed to be a reflection on merits of the case and shall have no bearing

on trial.

It is made clear that the petitioner shall not attempt to contact

the victim or any of her family members directly or indirectly. Any

infraction in this regard may entail cancellation of his bail.

( LISA GILL )
29.01.2018 JUDGE
rupi

Note: Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No
Whether Reportable: Yes / No

3 of 3
12-02-2018 01:30:22 :::

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2018 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please CLICK HERE to read Group Rules, If You agree then JOIN HERE

We handle Women centric biased laws like False 498A, Domestic Violence(DVACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA24, 125 CrPc, 307, 313, 376, 377, 406, 420, 506, 509 etc

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh