Ravinder Singh And Another v. State Of Haryana

-1CRM No.M-21009 of 2017 (O&M)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM No.M-21009 of 2017 (O&M) Date of Decision: 07th September, 2017.

Ravinder Singh and another

...Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

Present:

Mr. Vinod S.Bhardwaj, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. B.S.Virk, DAG, Haryana.

Mr.P.R.Yadav, Advocate for the respondent No.2.

**** INDERJIT SINGH, J.

CRM No.27533 of 2017 The application is allowed. Complainant-Krishan Kumar is hereby impleaded as respondent No.2 in this case. Amended memo of parties is taken on record.

CRM No.M-21009 of 2017 (O&M) Petitioners-Ravinder Singh and Nanita Devi have filed this petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity, 'Cr.P.C.') for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.174 dated 03.04.2017, registered at Police Station Bhiwani Sadar, District Bhiwani, Vineet Gulati 2017.09.08 11:26 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

-2CRM No.M-21009 of 2017 (O&M) under Sections 307, 323, 325 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Notice of motion was issued. Learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for respondent No.2 appeared and contested the petition. I have heard learned counsel for the parties as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record. From the record, I find that occurrence is stated to be of 01.05.2016 but the FIR has been got registered after about one year i.e. 03.04.2017. Secondly, it is a cross-version of a murder case. No injury has been attributed to petitioner No.2-Nanita Devi. As it is a case of version and cross-version, the trial Court is still to determine on the basis of evidence as to who is the aggressor party as the FIR has been registered after one year of the occurrence.

In pursuance of the interim order dated 02.06.2017, passed by this Court, the petitioners have already joined the investigation. They are not required for custodial interrogation. Therefore, no useful purpose will be served by sending the petitioners to custody. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case; without discussing the facts of the case in minute details and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find merit in this petition and the same is allowed. The order dated 02.06.2017, granting interim bail to the petitioners, is made absolute.

07.09.2017 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE Note:

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes Whether reportable :

No Vineet Gulati 2017.09.08 11:26 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh