Vijay Kumar @Bunty v. State Of Punjab

CRM-M-35312 of 2020 (O&M) Vijay Kumar @ Bunty v. State of Punjab 2) CRM-M-34915 of 2020 Bimla and another v. State of Punjab and another Present:- Mr. Arnav Kumar Sood, Advocate, for the petitioner in both the petitions.

Mr. Sidakmeet Singh Sandhu, AAG, Punjab Mr. Sandeep Dhul, Advocate, for the complainant. *** Case heard by way of video conferencing.



 

By this petition, filed under the provisions of Section 439 of the Cr.P.C, the petitioner seeks the concession of 'regular bail', upon FIR no.75, dated 19.05.2020, having been registered at Police Station Satnampura, Phagwara, District Kapurthala, alleging therein the commission of offences punishable under the provisions of Sections 315, 316 and 34 of the IPC. On 15.01.2021, the following order had been passed:-
 



      

  !"#  $ 

  "   %%  %      

 & ' (  % %#    "   (  ) *%   %    #       !

"    "



   " "" "# +  %   , %   *  *   **  &  

% 

"



        %    "

   #  -* . -  "    *  , %   *     **   #         #  *%  / 0!

#  

 12(3! # 
  ** 4%

"   

-2-  ' 125! 6% *   7 ". "/ 0

    **     %   " 0 ( (358( # 2  "     "8 #     %  *   ** 

  #    

 "  *           *   ** "  %    %  #%  %% .   "*" *  

%        #  %%"            %  6

"      * " 

%   "   . "   / 0 %  "* # %%        #  

#   **          #               *   

 % *  " .  %          % 9

9   "

    %%  2    "   1 + 8 :  %"# 0 ( (358(4 Learned State counsel, as also counsel for the petitioner, are ad idem that the case is still to be committed to the Court of Sessions. Looking at the affidavit of the respondent (complainant in the FIR) (copy Annexure P-3) and the compromise stated to have been arrived at between her and the petitioners (in both the petitions), without making any comment on the actual merits of the case, with learned counsel appearing for the complainant also not objecting to the same in view the compromise arrived at between the parties, the present petition is allowed, with the order dated 15.01.2021 granting interim bail to the petitioner, made absolute on the terms and conditions.

-3CRM-M-34915 of 2020 Though petitioner no.2 in this petition has been admitted to interim bail by this court earlier, with that order made absolute today in view of the compromise reached between the parties, with petitioner no.1 already on bail on her filing a different petition, as regards the quashing of the FIR, with the allegation being that a 6 months old foetus was aborted due to the alleged kick blows given by the petitioners, learned counsel for the petitioner would point to the medical evidence to show that it was not on account of any such kick blows (as he is contending). Adjourned to 07.04.2021.

01.03.2021 (AMOL RATTAN SINGH) vcgarg JUDGE