← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/41628/2016dismissed

Manjeet Singh v. State Of Punjab

2016-12-16Mr. Justice Harinder Singh Sidhu2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH (1) CRM No.M-41628 of 2016 (O&M) Manjeet Singh

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

...Respondent

(2) CRM No.M-41659 of 2016 (O&M) Rimpy

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

...Respondent

Date of Decision: December 16, 2016 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

Present:

Mr.Narinder S. Lucky, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr.P.S.Grewal, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.

**** INDERJIT SINGH, J.

Petitioners have filed these petitions under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.14 dated 26.01.2016 under Sections 308, 323, 341, 427, 148 149 IPC (later on Sections 307, 324, 325 and 326 IPC were added), registered at Police Station Mehatpur, District Jalandhar.

Vineet Gulati 2016.12.20 14:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CRM No.M-41628 of 2016 and connected case -2Notice of motion was issued and learned State counsel appeared and contested the petitions.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record. From the record, I find that petitioner Rimpy was named in the FIR and stated to be armed with kirpan, though no specific injury has been attributed to him. But when the statement of the injured was recorded, specific injuries were attributed to Rimpy. Similarly, petitioner Manjeet Singh, though not named in the FIR but injury with iron rod blow on the ankle of the injured has been attributed to him in the statement of the injured. The injured received so many injuries including fractures on the legs and arms etc.

Keeping in view the nature and gravity of the offence and the injuries attributed to both these petitioners by the injured, I do not find it a fit case where petitioners are entitled to benefit of anticipatory bail. Therefore, finding no merit in both the petitions, the same are dismissed.

December 16, 2016 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No Vineet Gulati 2016.12.20 14:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh