Sukhjinder Singh @ Price Verma v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-39312 of 2015 (O&M) Date of decision: 28.11.2015 Sukhjinder Singh alias Prince Verma ..Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ..Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY

1. Whether reporters of local newspapers may be allowed to see judgment? Yes/No

2. To be referred to reporters or not? Yes/No

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes/No

Present:

Mr. Sapan Dhir, Advocate for the petitioner.

Daya Chaudhary, J. (Oral) CRM-38704 of 2015 Allowed as prayed for.

CRM-38705 of 2015 This application is for placing on record Annexures P-12 and P-13 (colly).

Application is allowed and Annexures P-12 and P-13 (colly) are taken on record.

CRM-M-39312 of 2015 This is second petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.134 dated 13.08.2015 registered under Sections 363, 366, 376 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code and Section 376-D IPC, which was added later on, NEETU RANI 2015.12.04 11:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Criminal Misc. No. M-39312 of 2015 (O&M) at Police Station Sadar Dhuri, District Sangrur. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that co-accused of the petitioner has been granted anticipatory bail. The petitioner has falsely been implicated in the case because of the earlier dispute wherein a compromise was effected between the parties and a specific statement was made that the complainant was not ready to go with the parents. No custodial interrogation is required. Heard arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner and have also perused the contents of the FIR as well as order passed in the earlier petition.

Co-accused of the petitioner has been released on anticipatory bail being woman as there cannot be any allegation of Section 376 IPC against her. Earlier petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed on 05.11.2015. Although all efforts have been made by learned counsel for the petitioner to show that the present petition has been filed under changed circumstances but no changed ground has been shown to be made out to grant anticipatory bail except that the challan has been presented. The main accused-Ninder Sharma is still absconding. The petition filed by co-accused has also been dismissed. There are specific allegations against the petitioner and by considering the allegations levelled in the FIR and nature of offence, no ground is made out to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner and the petition being devoid of any merit is dismissed. 28.11.2015 (DAYA CHAUDHARY) neetu JUDGE NEETU RANI 2015.12.04 11:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh