Sumit @ Meeta v. State Of Haryana And Others

PANKAJ KUMAR 2021.08.04 17:14 I am the author of this document CRM-M No.38816 of 2020 (O&M) -1IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.38816 of 2020 (O&M) Date of Decision:02.08.2021 (Heard through VC) Sumit @ Meeta

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and others

...Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR Present:- Mr. Vikas Gulia, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Dhruv Sihag, AAG, Haryana.

Mr. Amit Jhanji, Senior Advocate with Mr. H.S. Sidhu, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3.

**** JAISHREE THAKUR, J.

(ORAL) This is a petition that has been filed for cancellation of regular bail granted to respondents No.2 and 3 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sonipat vide order dated 09.09.2020.

Learned senior counsel appearing for the private respondents No.2 & 3 would submit that allegations as set out in the petition are nonspecific as to how the private respondents have abused the concession of bail. It is argued that in fact the statement of the petitioner already stands recorded and therefore, the question of them threatening the petitioner herein would not arise.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-State would also submit that in fact no complaint has been received in the police station regarding violation of the order allowing bail to the private

CRM-M No.38816 of 2020 (O&M) -2respondents.

Keeping in view the statements made and the fact that there is no specific incident shown to the court as to how bail bonds have been violated by the private respondents, no ground is made out to interfere in the orders passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sonipat. Consequently, the instant petition stands dismissed. (JAISHREE THAKUR) August 02, 2021 JUDGE Pankaj* Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No