CRM No.M-36880 of 2017 and a connected case

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH

1. Criminal Misc. No.M- 36880 of 2017(OM)
Date of Decision: January 23 , 2018.

Surender and another …… PETITIONER(s)

Versus

State of Haryana and another …… RESPONDENT (s)

2. Criminal Misc. No. M- 37324 of 2017(OM).

Ramesh and another …… PETITIONER(s)

Versus

State of Haryana and another …… RESPONDENT (s)

CORAM:- HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE LISA GILL

Present: Mr. Ashok Kaushik, Advocate
for the petitioners (in CRM No.M-36880 of 2017).
Mr. Vikram Lakhlan, Kaushik, Advocate
for the petitioners (in CRM No.M-37324 of 2017)

Mr. Anmol Malik, AAG, Haryana.

Mr. R.S.Sangwan, Advocate
for the complainant/respondent No.2.
*****
1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see
the judgment?
2. To be referred to the reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest?
*****

LISA GILL, J.

This order shall dispose of CRM No.M-36880 of 2017 (Surender

1 of 3
26-01-2018 03:46:43 :::
CRM No.M-36880 of 2017 and a connected case

-2-

and another v. State of Haryana and another) and CRM No.M-37324 of 2017

(Ramesh and another v. State of Haryana and another).

Prayer in these petitions is for grant of anticipatory bail to the

petitioners in FIR No.99 dated 05.08.2017 under Sections 147/149/323/342/

365/354/498A/506 IPC, registered at Police Station Bahal, District Bhiwani.

Petitioners Surender and Sudesh in CRM No.M-36880 of 2017 are the brother-

in-law (Jeth) and sister-in-law (Jethani), respectively, of the complainant.

Petitioners Ramesh and Molu Ram in CRM No.M-37324 of 2017 are the cousin

brother and father, respectively, of the complainant’s husband.

It is submitted that all the petitioners were afforded the concession

of bail pending trial in the abovesaid FIR on 25.08.2017 (Annexure P2). The

offences punishable under Sections 365/354/498A IPC have been added

subsequently. The petitioners have thereafter joined investigation. They

undertake to face the proceedings and not misuse the concession of anticipatory

bail, if afforded to them. Therefore, it is prayed that these petitions be allowed.

Learned counsel for the complainant has opposed these petitions

while submitting that serious allegations have been raised against the

petitioners. However, it is not denied that all the four petitioners were earlier

afforded the concession of bail pending trial on 25.08.2017.

Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Ramesh

Kumar, verifies that the offences punishable under Sections 365/354/498A IPC

were added subsequently on 05.09.2017. All the petitioners in this case have

thereafter joined investigation as well. None of the petitioners are not reported

to be involved in any other criminal case.

There are no allegations on behalf of the State that the petitioners

2 of 3
26-01-2018 03:46:44 :::
CRM No.M-36880 of 2017 and a connected case

-3-

are likely to abscond or that they are likely to dissuade the witnesses from

deposing true facts before the Court, if released on bail.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances as above but without

commenting upon or expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, these

petitions are allowed. In the event of arrest of the petitioners, they shall be

released on interim bail to the satisfaction of Investigating Officer. Petitioners

shall comply with the conditions stipulated in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

It is clarified that none of the observations made hereinabove shall

be construed to be a reflection on the merits of the case. The same are solely

confined for the purpose of decision of the present petition.

( LISA GILL )
January 23 , 2018. JUDGE
‘om’

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No

3 of 3
26-01-2018 03:46:44 :::