Abhay Singh Rana v. State Of Ut Chandigarh
!
"#$# %&''(
)
)
&
*+ '
)
)+
! !
"#$%& & ' ()' " & * ++++ )+
, '
. ,-./-0/0.
1,0.-00/00
!
"# $ %& % !
!
"$' &
( )
* +
, - * ) -
.
'
- - *
) -
) - * + , / *0'
+ 0 ) 0
))
-
-
* ) '
)-
- ) ,
- ) -
-
* 0 *
+ +
+
-
) -
) -
1 21% ' %% ) 3&
'
)
4!
1 5
6 ' !
2 *
1 6
' 2 '
)
( !
* (
)
+ -
0 70'
-
* + 2 - 9
-
" " )
-* :
" "
) &8
!
'
; !
) % ' !;%.' !
' 3'
&
) )
-
0200/0. Meantime, keeping in mind law enunciated by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Thana Singh v. Central Bureau of Narcotics, (2013) 2 SCC 590, Arnab
( Manoranjan Goswami V. State ofMaharashtra, (2021) 2 SCC 427,Satender Kumar Antil V. CBI (2022)10 SCC 51, SiddharamSatlingappaMhetre V. State of Maharashtra &Ors., 2010 SCC OnLine SC 1375, Shri Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia V. State of Punjab (1980) 2 Supreme Court Cases 565,Arnesh Kumar V. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273, age, qualification and Whatsapp messages of prosecutrix which are not disputed by learned counsel for State and complainant, at the first instance, the petitioner is directed to appear before investigation officer on 20.01.2023 and thereafter as directed by IO. In the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be admitted to interim bail on furnishing of bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of investigating/arresting officer. The petitioner shall co-operate the investigating officer. )
))
-
0
'
*
) 9 1 * *
--
))
0
'
- & :
3 "* #*" 4 5 $" * -./-0/0. * "
"
2.6708! !
$ *#**" 9
*) #* 9*
"" #*
" "# ( "
" "
:
! * ! " "#"
!
)+
02/00/0.
2
;
) 9 < 9( <
=>