Nikhil Sharma v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM No.M-16079 of 2017 (O&M) Date of Decision: May 08, 2017 Nikhil Sharma

...Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

Present:

Mr.Rahul Jain, Advocate for Mr.Jasmeet Singh Bedi, Advocate for the petitioner.

**** INDERJIT SINGH, J.

Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.132 dated 14.12.2016 under Sections 307, 336, 429, 452, 323, 148, 149 IPC read with Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act registered at Police Station City Budhladha. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the record.

From the record, I find that the present petitioner is named in the FIR. As per the allegations, Nikhil Sharma fired on the dog of the complainant, who died and when the complainant protested regarding the death of the dog, then Nikhil Sharma, with the intention to kill the complainant, fired three shots continuously towards him. One of the fire shot hit the complainant on the right side of the waist. Vineet Gulati 2017.05.09 16:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CRM No.M-16079 of 2017 -2Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, nature and gravity of the offence and in view of the active role played by the petitioner in the commission of the offence and the facts that petitioner is main accused and weapon is still to be recovered, I do not find it a fit case where petitioner is entitled to benefit of anticipatory bail. Therefore, finding no merit in the present petition, the same is dismissed.

May 08, 2017 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No Vineet Gulati 2017.05.09 16:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh