Ram Murti v. State Of Punjab

CRM-M 11401 of 2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M 11401 of 2015 Date of decision : 08.05.2015 Ram Murti ....Petitioner V/s State of Punjab ....Respondent BEFORE : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA

Present:

Mr. GPS Pathania, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Shilesh Gupta, Addl. A.G. Punjab.

RAJAN GUPTA J.

This is a petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking pre-arrest bail in a case registered against the petitioner vide FIR No. 22 dated 06.02.2015 under Sections 307, 120-B IPC at Police Station Division No. 1, District Pathankot.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that dispute is basically matrimonial in nature. A compromise has already been effected. Petitioner, thus, deserves the concession of pre-arrest bail.

Learned State counsel has opposed the plea. According to him, petitioner committed the crime with the intention to kill the complainant. Factum of compromise, if any, is not known to the investigating agency.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties. FIR was lodged by Ajay Suri. He alleged that on 06.02.2015 he had gone to the shop of his father-in-law and asked him to send his wife with him. His father-in-law, however, got angry and threw thinner at his face. He lit the same with the AJAY KUMAR 2015.05.11 16:20 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

CRM-M 11401 of 2015 match-box. As a result, face and hands of the complainant were burnt. Fire was put off by certain persons of the locality by pouring water. Complainant was admitted to Civil Hospital where he was subjected to medical examination. According to MLR, superficial and deep corrosive burns were found on the person of the complainant. Keeping in view nature of allegations, I am of the considered view that petitioner is not entitled to concession of prearrest bail. Dismissed. May 08, 2015 (RAJAN GUPTA) Ajay JUDGE AJAY KUMAR 2015.05.11 16:20 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document