Sikander v. State Of Haryana

CRM-M-38988-2014 (O&M)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-38988-2014 (O&M).

Decided on: February 4, 2015.

Sikander ..... Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Haryana ..... Respondent(s) * * *

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI PRESENT None for the petitioner.

Mr.M.S.Sidhu, Addl. A.G., Haryana.

Mr.Sandeep Sharma, Advocate, for the complainant.

M.M.S. BEDI, J (ORAL) Petitioner has been summoned as additional accused in a case which had been registered at the instance of Kaptan Singh alleging that his nephew was assaulted by Vikram on 21.5.2012 regarding which a protest was raised by the complainant which was not relished as a result of which Pehlald, Naresh, Surender, Hemraj and Rahul came to the house of the complainant in the evening and abused him.

Petitioner along with Sunil and Rohtash allegedly came on the motorcycle and asked Vikram to fire on the complainant party on which Surender fired from his country made pistol with an intention to kill Bhisham hitting his forehead. Hemraj and Naresh fired at Rahul. Non-applicant inflicted iron rod blow on the back of the complainant. The petitioner allegedly fired a shot with his country RAJ KUMAR ARORA 2015.02.05 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-38988-2014 (O&M) made pistol with an intention to kill but it did not hit anyone. The petitioner during the course of investigation was found innocent. His name having been specifically mentioned by the complainant in his statement, the petitioner was summoned as additional accused. Taking into consideration the fact that a dual version has already cropped up and his involvement in the matter or his culpability being a member of unlawful assembly will be a debatable issue, he can be granted the concession of pre-arrest bail. He was directed to appear before the trial Court on 6.1.2015.

No one is present before this Court to inform whether he has already put in appearance or not. This petition is disposed of with a direction that in case the petitioner has already put in appearance before the trial Court on 6.1.2015, he will remain on bail against the bail bonds already furnished by him during the entire period of trial subject to the conditions that he will continue to appear before the Court and will not absent himself without any sufficient cause. In case he has not complied with the order dated 22.12.2014 by not appearing before the trial Court on 6.1.2015, this petition will be deemed to have been dismissed At this stage, Mr.J.S.Hooda, Advocate, for the petitioner appeared and informed the Court that the petitioner has put in appearance before the trial Court.

(M.M.S. BEDI) February 4, 2015.

JUDGE rka