SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Gulshan vs State Of Haryana on 16 February, 2018


Criminal Misc. No. M- 5979 of 2018 (OM)
Date of decision : February 16, 2018

Gulshan …..Petitioner


State of Haryana ….Respondent


Present: Ms. Sunita Nambiar, Advocate for
Mr. Abhimanyu Singh, Advocate
for the petitioner.

Mr. Ramesh Kumar Ambavta, AAG, Haryana.


The petitioner prays for bail pending trial in FIR No. 674 dated

14.10.2017 under Sections 323, 376, 498A, 506 IPC registered at Police

Station Bhiwani city, District Bhiwani.

It is submitted that the petitioner, who is the husband of the

complainant, has been falsely implicated in this case. He has been in

custody since October, 2017. It is argued that the allegations in the FIR are

absolutely incorrect and this is reflected from a perusal of the medico legal

report (Annexure P-1). Allegations of physical abuse to the complainant at

the hands of the petitioner are complete negated by the said report. The

petitioner, it is submitted, had never harassed or ill-treated the complainant

in any manner. The petitioner has a filed petition under Section 9 of the

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and he is desirous of resumption of matrimonial

ties but the complainant never came forward. It is further submitted that

application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. has been moved for summoning

others to face trial as an additional accused after examination-in-chief of the

1 of 2
25-02-2018 10:52:24 :::
Criminal Misc. No. M- 5979 of 2018 (OM) -2-

complainant. Trial, in this case, is not likely to conclude in the near future. It

is, thus, prayed that this petition be allowed.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

Learned counsel for the State, on instructions, from ASI

Narender Kumar, verifies the authenticity of the medico legal report

(Annexure P-1). It is verified that the application under Section 319 Cr.P.C.,

as mentioned above, has indeed been filed and is pending before the learned

trial Court for adjudication. The petitioner is not involved in any other

criminal case. Trial, in this case, is not likely to conclude in the near future.

There are no allegations on behalf of the State that 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.

No useful purpose shall be served by keeping the petitioner

incarcerated any longer. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances 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.

It is reiterated that none of the observations made herein above

are a reflection on the merits of the case and shall have no bearing on the


(Lisa Gill)
February 16, 2018 Judge
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No

Whether reportable : Yes/No

2 of 2
25-02-2018 10:52:26 :::

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Copyright © 2022 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 read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation