High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/40933/2017dismissed

Surjit Singh v. State Of Haryana

2017-11-01Mrs Justice Daya Chaudhary2 pages

-1CRM-M-40933 of 2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-40933 of 2017 Date of Decision: 01.11.2017 Surjit Singh ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN Present: - Mr. J.S. Thind, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Ashwani Verma, Advocate, for the complainant. RAMENDRA JAIN, J. (ORAL) Prayer in the instant petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been made for grant of anticipatory bail to petitioner Surjit Singh in case FIR No.347 dated 02.10.2017 under Sections 323, 324, 326 and 34 IPC registered at Police Station Bhuna.

Allegation against the petitioner is that he gave sword blow on the complainant and the same hit upon the finger of his right hand, which has been declared grievous by the doctor.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that cross case has also been registered against the complainant party. It is yet to be ascertained as to who is the aggressor for the same occurrence. Alleged injury falsely attributed to the petitioner is on the little finger of the complainant, which is self-inflicted. The complainant party, eleven in number, caused injuries to the petitioner's side with deadly weapons. The complainant party caused four injuries to the petitioner out of which one is Ravinder Singh 2017.11.03 14:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document on vital party i.e. on the head.

-2CRM-M-40933 of 2017 Learned counsel for the complainant, who has appeared on his own, vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner submitting that the FIR, lodged after one day against the complainant party, is, in fact, a counter-blast to the FIR lodged by the complainant against the petitioner.

Considering overall circumstances and the fact that both the sides used deadly weapons and caused injuries with the same to each other, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.

(RAMENDRA JAIN) November 01, 2017 JUDGE R.S.

Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Ravinder Singh 2017.11.03 14:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document