Dharampal v. State Of Haryana And ANR
CRM-M-16460 of 2017 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CRM-M-16460 of 2017 Date of Decision: 14.05.2018 Dharampal ....Petitioner
VERSUS
State of Haryana and others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA
Present:
Mr. Mohit Rahtore, Advocate for Mr. J.P. Jangu, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Satish Saini, DAG, Haryana.
Mr. P.R. Yadav, Advocate for respondents no. 4 and 5.
******* SURINDER GUPTA, J.(Oral) The present petition has been filed under Section 439 (2) Code of Criminal Procedure for cancellation of bail allowed to respondents no. 4 and 5 vide order dated 16.02.2017 passed in CRM-M-40992 of 2016 in case bearing FIR No. 267 dated 04.07.2016 registered for the offence punishable under Section 379 of Indian Penal Code (for short, "IPC") at Police Station Pataudi, District Gurgaon.
Heard.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that bail was allowed to respondents no. 4 and 5 on the affidavit of Dilbagh Singh son of Dharampal wherein he has stated that engine of the bus was got replaced by complainant himself. Now Dilbagh Singh has given another affidavit wherein he has stated that his earlier affidavit was obtained by respondents no. 4 and 5 after administering some intoxicant. In this affidavit, he has Jitender Kumar 2018.05.14 16:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document HIGH COURT, CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-16460 of 2017 -2also stated that Mohar Singh son of Banwari resident of Behror, District Alwar (Rajasthan) has sold the aforesaid bus to Dharampal. The dispute in this case appears to be regarding title over the bus and the matter is still under investigation. No reason is made out to cancel the bail allowed to respondents no. 4 and 5. The instant petition has no merit and the same is dismissed. May 14, 2018 ( SURINDER GUPTA ) jk JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No Jitender Kumar 2018.05.14 16:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document HIGH COURT, CHANDIGARH