Narender v. State Of Haryana

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ......

Criminal Misc. No.M-8614 of 2017 .....

Date of decision:5.4.2017 Narender

...Petitioner

v.

State of Haryana

...Respondent

....

Coram:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh .....

Present:

Mr. R.A. Sheoran, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Virk, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana for the respondent-State.

Mr. Abhimanyu Singh, Advocate for the complainant. .....

Inderjit Singh, J.

The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.116 dated 29.4.2016 registered for the offences under Sections 302, 307, 324, 323, 506, 147, 148 and 149 IPC at Police Station Tosham, District Bhiwani.

Notice of motion has been issued in this case. Mr. B.S. Virk, learned Deputy Advocate General, Haryana has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent-State and Mr. Abhimanyu Singh, Advocate has appeared for the complainant and contested this petition.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and learned Deputy Harpal Singh Parmar 2017.04.06 16:33 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Cr. Misc. No.M-8614 of 2017 [2] Advocate General, Haryana appearing for the respondent-State and have gone through the record.

From the record, I find that the FIR in the present case has been registered on the statement of Surender, who stated that on the intervening night of 28/29.4.2016, his uncle Somvir after collecting money of `75,000/- from the commission agent, was coming to his village from Village Sangwan. When he reached in front of the house of Ashok at about 12.15 a.m., he found Dilbag, Fateh Singh, Ashok, Narender alias Monu, Sonu, Vijender, Satish, Sombir, Sunil, Bhim and Vikas having axes, dandas and lathis in their hands. Then the present petitioner Narender alias Monu along with other accused opened attack upon Sombir and caused many injuries on his head, mouth, chest, feet and hands and money was also taken from his bag. Sombir was got admitted in the hospital. After that he succumbed to the injuries.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case and the fact that the petitioner is named in the FIR and active role has been attributed to him, I do not find it a fit case where the present petitioner is entitled to the benefit of bail.

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

April 5, 2017.

(Inderjit Singh) Judge *hsp* NOTE:

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes Whether reportable:

No Harpal Singh Parmar 2017.04.06 16:33 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh