Ompati @ Omal v. State Of Haryana And Another

Crl. Misc. No. M-35965 of 2017 [ 1 ]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-35965 of 2017 Date of Decision : February 08, 2018 Ompati @ Omal .............................................................Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and another ................................. Respondents Crl. Misc. No. M-44469 of 2017 Lovkesh ....................................................................... Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and another .................................... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL ...

Present:

Mr. Sudhanshu Makkar, Advocate for the petitioner in CRM-M-35965-2017.

Mr. Deepender Singh, Advocate for the petitioner in CRM-M-44469-2017.

Mr. Ramesh Kumar Ambavta, AAG, Haryana.

None for respondent No.2.

...

LISA GILL, J. (Oral) This order shall dispose of CRM-M-35965-2017 as well as CRM-M-44469-2017.

The petitioners in both the cases seek the concession of anticipatory bail in Criminal Complaint No.116-1C of 2013/2015 dated 08.05.2013/02.01.2015 under Sections 302/498-A IPC read with Section 34 IPC registered at Police Station Sadar, Bhiwani. It is submitted that the petitioners were found innocent during Rupinder Kaur 2018.02.08 17:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Crl. Misc. No. M-35965 of 2017 [ 2 ] investigation in FIR No. 391 dated 04.09.2011 which was registered in respect to the incident in question.

The petitioner-Lovkesh is the husband of the deceased and petitioner Ompati @ Omal is the 70 year old mother-in-law of the deceased. Both the petitioners have now been summoned to face trial in the above said criminal complaint vide order dated 24.05.2017. The petitioners undertake to face trial and not abuse the concession of anticipatory bail if confirmed. They have appeared before the learned trial Court pursuant to interim orders passed by this Court and they have been regularly appearing thereafter before the learned trial Court. It is, thus prayed that these petitions be allowed.

Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Raj Kumar, verifies that cancellation report in FIR No. 391 dated 04.09.2011 was presented. It is confirmed that both the petitioners have appeared before the learned trial Court pursuant to order dated 26.09.2017 passed in CRMM-35965-2017 and order dated 22.11.2017 passed in CRM-M-44469-2017 . Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, it is considered just and expedient to allow these petitions. Consequently, interim bail afforded to the petitioners pursuant to order dated 26.09.2017 passed in CRM-M-35965-2017 and order dated 22.11.2017 passed in CRM-M44469-2017 be made absolute subject to the petitioners furnishing fresh bail bonds and surety to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. ( LISA GILL ) 08.02.2018 JUDGE rupi Note: Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable:

Yes / No Rupinder Kaur 2018.02.08 17:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document