High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/9360/2022dismissed

Pardeep Kumar v. State Of Haryana

2022-03-07Mr. Justice Harinder Singh Sidhu2 pages

CRM-M-9360 of 2022 (O&M) #1#

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-9360 of 2022 (O&M) Date of Decision: 07.03.2022 Pardeep Kumar ......Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARINDER SINGH SIDHU

Present:

Mr. Parveen Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner. HARINDER SINGH SIDHU, J Petitioner has filed this second application for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.274 dated 06.11.2020 under Sections 148,149,323,325,341,427,506,380,307,201 IPC registered at P.S Krishna Gate, District Kurukshetra.

Learned counsel for petitioner contends that co-accused Vijay has not named the petitioner of having inflicted any brick blow on the injured Anand and, therefore, allegation of prosecution has no substance. Besides, he reiterates his contentions as urged in the first application stating that neither petitioner has been named in FIR nor any injury has been attributed to him.

A bare perusal of status report filed in CRM-M-44216 of 2020 by co-accused Pardeep reveals that during investigation of case, the photographs of place of occurrence were obtained from CCTV footage. The CCTV footage clearly shows that a group of assailants attacked injured Anand which resulted in causing grievous injuries to him including fracture MANOJ KUMAR 2022.03.08 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-9360 of 2022 (O&M) #2# of his skull. It is further stated that during investigation, the complainant identified co-accused Vijay and he has been arrested. In his disclosure statement, co-accused Vijay disclosed that Pardeep (petitioner) was also involved in the alleged occurrence. He further disclosed that co-accused Prem and the petitioner inflicted multiple brick blows on injured Anand and complainant. It is further stated in reply that the doctor has given his opinion that the 'Injuries are grievous in nature'. In the facts and circumstances of the present case and perusing the allegations leveled against the petitioner, and considering the gravity of offence, this court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Dismissed.

March 07, 2022 (Harinder Singh Sidhu) manoj Judge Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No MANOJ KUMAR 2022.03.08 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document