High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/40330/2018dismissed

Vivek Singh v. State Of Haryana

2018-09-19Mr. Justice Arvind Singh Sangwan2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM No.M-40330 of 2018 (O&M) Date of Decision: September 19, 2018 Vivek Singh

...Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Haryana

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

Present:

Mr.Kunal Dawar, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr.Sukhdeep Parmar, DAG, Haryana for the respondent-State.

**** INDERJIT SINGH, J.

Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.151 dated 20.06.2018 nder Sections 306, 34 I PC and Section 25 of the Arms Act, registered at Police Station Kasola, District Rewari.

Notice of motion was issued. Learned State counsel appeared and contested the petition.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record. From the record, I find that FIR in the present case has been registered on the statement of Gulab Devi. As per the FIR, complainant's husband committed suicide by shooting himself. As per the allegations in VINEET GULATI 2018.09.20 16:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CRM No.M-40330 of 2018 -2the FIR, complainant and her husband were running a company along with partners and they all have separate share. One Satish employed Vivek in the company. By pressurizing complainant and her husband, Satish got transferred half of their share in the name of Vivek and defrauded and looted them (complainant party). It is further in the FIR that complainant and her husband came to know three days back that accused have usurped the articles of the company, due to which, complainant's husband was tensed. The complainant further stated that her husband Bhupinder Singh took the step as Vivek and Satish abetted him to do so. A suicide note was also found from the pocket of Bhupinder Singh. I have also seen the suicide note and present petitioner is also named in the suicide note. Keeping in view the above facts that petitioner is named in the FIR as well as in the suicide and serious allegations have been levelled against him, I find that no ground is made out for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Therefore, finding no merit in the present petition, the same is dismissed.

September 19, 2018 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No VINEET GULATI 2018.09.20 16:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh