Kuldeep Singh v. State Of Haryana

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh .....

Criminal Misc. No.M-631 of 2019 Date of decision:13.02.2019 Kuldeep Singh alias Goga

...Petitioner

v.

State of Haryana

...Respondent

....

Coram:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh .....

Present:

Mr. Sandeep Punchhi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sharad Kumar Yadav, DAG, Haryana for the respondentState. Mr. Naresh Jain, Advocate for the complainant. .....

Inderjit Singh, J.

The petitioner has filed this second petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.0270 dated 12.9.2018 registered for the offences under Sections 323, 324, 326 and 34 IPC at Police Station Sadar, Sirsa, District Sirsa.

Notice of motion was issued in this case.

Mr. Sharad Kumar Yadav, learned DAG, Haryana has appeared on behalf of the respondent-State and Mr. Naresh Jain, learned Advocate has appeared for the complainant and contested this petition. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and learned State counsel and have gone through the record.

HARPAL SINGH PARMAR 2019.02.15 15:34 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Cr. Misc. No.M-631 of 2019 [2] The first bail petition has been dismissed on merit by this Court vide order dated 13.12.2018. The petitioner is stated to be armed with a Gandasi and gave Gandasi blow from the sharp side on the head of the complainant and second blow on the right hand finger next to thumb. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case; the fact that the present petitioner was armed with a deadly weapon; gave injury on the vital part of the body; grievous injury on the finger is also attributed to him and Gandasi is still to be recovered, he is required for custodial interrogation. Otherwise, keeping in view the active role played by the present petitioner and in view of the injuries caused by him, I do not find it a fit case where the petitioner is entitled for the grant of anticipatory bail. Otherwise also, no new fact and ground has been mentioned for the grant of anticipatory bail.

Therefore, finding no merit in this petition, the same is dismissed.

February 13, 2019.

(Inderjit Singh) Judge *hsp* NOTE:

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes Whether reportable:

No HARPAL SINGH PARMAR 2019.02.15 15:34 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh