High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/8065/2018dismissed

Sunil v. State Of Haryana

2018-03-01Mr Justice Rajiv Sharma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-8065-2018 (O&M) Date of Decision: 01.03.2018 Sunil --Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana --Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA. Present:- Mr. P.K. Rapria, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amrik Narwal, D.A.G., Haryana.

*** TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA.J (Oral) CRM-7509-2018 Application is allowed as prayed for.

Affidavit of Lado Devi dated 26.2.2018 is taken on record at Annexure P-5.

Main Case The instant petition has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C seeking the benefit of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner in case F.I.R. No.0290 dated 22.12.2017 under sections 332, 353, 379-A I.P.C, registered at Police Station, Kalayat, District Kaithal.

Learned counsel for the parties have been heard. FIR came to be registered on the written complaint of HC Kuldeep Singh posted at Police Station, Kalayat. As per complainant's version he along with one HC Mukesh had gone to a particular village in connection with investigation of Report No.22 dated 19.12.2017 received at Police Station Kalayat. Apparently, one Lado Devi had lodged a complaint as regards assault having taken place and in which she allegedly received certain injuries. Present petitioner is none

CRM-M-8065-2018 (O&M) -2other than the grandson of Lado Devi. Allegations are that on 22.12.2017 when the two police officials reached at the village, then the present petitioner abused the police officials, manhandled them, snatched a mobile phone and thereafter even pelted bricks at the police party. Counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that the story put forth is on the face of it improbable as one person single handedly could not have taken on two police officials. It has also been pleaded in the petition and particularly in paragraph 3 that the entire version is concocted inasmuch as the complainant HC Kuldeep Singh as also his colleague have not got any medical examination conducted.

During the course of hearing learned State counsel upon instructions from ASI Kashmir Singh has furnished for perusal of this Court the MLR conducted at C.H.C Kalayat dated 23.12.2017 and which reflects simple injuries.

Prima facie the version set out by the complainant finds corroboration from the medical record.

It is a case where the petitioner has obstructed police officials from discharging their duties. Allegations are as regards having assaulted them as well.

Against the backdrop of the allegations, this Court is not inclined to extend in favour of the petitioner the concession of pre-arrest bail.

Petition is dismissed.

(TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA) JUDGE 01.03.2018 lucky Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No