← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/753/2015dismissed

Vikram v. State Of Haryana

2015-02-02Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Criminal Misc. No.M-753 of 2015 Criminal Misc. No.M-753 of 2015 Criminal Misc. No.M-753 of 2015 Criminal Misc. No.M-753 of 2015 Date of Decision: 2 Date of Decision: 2 Date of Decision: 2 Date of Decision: 2nd nd nd nd February, 2015 February, 2015 February, 2015 February, 2015 Vikram ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ....Respondent

CORAM:

CORAM:

CORAM:

CORAM:

Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Daya Chaudhary Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Daya Chaudhary Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Daya Chaudhary Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Daya Chaudhary **** **** **** **** 1.

Whether reporters of local newspapers may be allowed to see judgment?

2.

To be referred to reporters or not?

3.

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? **** **** **** ****

Present:

Mr. S.K. Panwar, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Deepak Sabharwal, Addl. A.G., Haryana.

**** **** **** **** DAYA CHAUDHARY, J.(Oral) DAYA CHAUDHARY, J.(Oral) DAYA CHAUDHARY, J.(Oral) DAYA CHAUDHARY, J.(Oral) The present petition has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.289 dated 07.06.2014, registered under Section 304B IPC at Police Station Hodal, District Palwal during the pendency of the trial. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated and is not involved in any manner in this case. Initially, he was found innocent by the Investigating Agency due to lack of evidence. He further submits that no role has been attributed to him. Subsequently, the petitioner has been summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C. to face

Criminal Misc. No.M-753 of 2015 Criminal Misc. No.M-753 of 2015 Criminal Misc. No.M-753 of 2015 Criminal Misc. No.M-753 of 2015 -2- -2- -2- -2trial. Learned counsel also submits that the petitioner is ready to join investigation and abide by all the terms and conditions to be imposed by this Court as well as by the trial Court. Learned State counsel opposes grant of bail to the petitioner.

Heard the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner.

After going through the summoning order and also the allegations levelled against him, he is at par to other co-accused who are already facing trial. Simply stating that the petitioner is ready to join investigation is not sufficient to grant bail to him. Moreover, the offence is under Section 304B IPC and the petitioner has not challenged the summoning order so far. It cannot be said that he has wrongly been summoned by the trial court. No ground is made out to grant anticipatory bail. The present petition is, therefore, dismissed.

However, in case, the petitioner surrenders before the trial Court and moves an application for regular bail before the trial Court, the trial Court is directed to decide the same in accordance with law within a period of seven days from the date of filing of the application for regular bail.

02.02.2015 (DAYA CHAUDHARY) (DAYA CHAUDHARY) (DAYA CHAUDHARY) (DAYA CHAUDHARY) sonia g.

JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE