SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Sonu Rastogi vs State Of Haryana on 30 November, 2017


Criminal Misc. No. M- 33478 of 2017 (OM)
Date of decision : November 30, 2017

Sonu Rastogi …..Petitioner


State of Haryana and another ….Respondents


Present: Mr. Yogesh Goel, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Sanjay K. Saini, AAG, Haryana.


The petitioner prays for bail pending trial in FIR No. 232

dated 20.03.2017 under Sections 498A/304B, 34 IPC registered at

Police Station Sector 5, Gurgaon, District Gurugram.

It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely

implicated in this case. Marriage of the petitioner with the deceased

took place in the year 2010. The unfortunate incident took place on

19.03.2017. It is submitted that there is nothing on record to show that

any ill-treatment or harassment was ever meted out to the deceased in

the interregnum at the hands of the petitioner and her in-laws.

Moreover, the complainant, in this case, while deposing as PW1 before

the learned trial Court has not supported the prosecution version. The

petitioner, it is stated, is not involved in any other criminal case. It is,

thus, prayed that this petition be allowed.

Certified copy of the statement of the complainant PW1

produced in Court today is taken on record subject to just exceptions.

1 of 2
02-12-2017 06:33:59 :::
Criminal Misc. No. M- 33478 of 2017 (OM) -2-

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

Learned counsel for the State is unable to deny that the

complainant did not support the prosecution version. Learned counsel

for the State, on instructions, from ASI Narvir Singh, verifies that the

petitioner is not involved in any other criminal case.

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 trial.

(Lisa Gill)
November 30, 2017 Judge
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No

Whether reportable : Yes/No

2 of 2
02-12-2017 06:33:59 :::

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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

Copyright © 2021 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