Saheed v. State Of Haryana

In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh Date of Decision:-21.7.2022 Saheed ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL Present:- Mr. Munfaid Khan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rahul Mohan, DAG, Haryana.

***** GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J. (Oral) 1.

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking grant of anticipatory bail in respect of a case registered vide FIR No.397 dated 14.5.2019, Police Station Sadar Nuh, District Nuh, under Sections 148, 149, 302 of Indian Penal Code and Section 25 of Arms Act.

2.

The FIR was lodged at the instance of Deenu, wherein it is alleged that the petitioner alongwith 26 other persons, who are all named therein, had inflicted injuries to complainant's nephew Sapaat. The petitioner is stated to be armed with a 'farsa' and is also alleged to have given beatings to complainant's nephew on account of which the complainant's nephew succumbed to his injuries.

( 2 ) 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a false FIR has been lodged against the petitioner and that general allegations have been levelled against all the accused. Learned counsel has further submitted that falsity of the FIR would be evident from the fact that as many as 22 accused have been found innocent.

4.

Opposing the petition, learned State counsel has submitted that since the petitioner is specifically named in the FIR and is also stated to be armed with a 'farsa' and also that the deceased was found to have sustained 5 wounds including puncture wound, lacerations etc., the complicity of petitioner is clearly evident. It has further been submitted that the matter has been fairly investigated by the police and upon finding 22 persons to be innocent, they have been given a clean chit. Learned State counsel has further informed that the petitioner is also involved in FIR No.181, dated 28.10.2016 registered at Police Station Nagina, under Sections 376-D and 302 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and has also been declared a proclaimed offender, in respect of which FIR No.133, dated 29.6.

2021, Police Station Nagina, under Section 174-A of Indian Penal Code has been lodged, and as such there is apprehension that the petitioner, in case released on bail, would flee from justice. It has thus been submitted that, in any case, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner would be required to unearth all the finer details of the occurrence.

5.

I have considered rival submissions addressed before this Court. 6.

Keeping in view the fact that there are specific allegations against the petitioner of having caused injuries to complainant's nephew Sapaat (deceased) with the help of a 'farsa' and while also noticing the conduct of

( 3 ) petitioner in having been declared a proclaimed offender in another case, this Court does not find any ground for grant of anticipatory bail. The petition is sans merit and is hereby dismissed.

21.7.2022 ( Gurvinder Singh Gill ) pankaj Judge Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No