Partly allowed

Somveer v. State of Hry.

Punjab & Haryana HC6 Nov 2006CRM/60147/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of numerous criminal miscellaneous petitions and revisions involving applications for anticipatory bail, regular bail, and sentence suspension. Orders granted bail in cases under IPC and NDPS Acts where trial delay was evident, dismissed bail cancellation petitions upon presentation of challans, and ordered sentence suspension pending revisions.

What did the court decide?

Various orders granting anticipatory bail, regular bail, making interim orders absolute, declaring petitions infructuous due to challan presentation, and suspending sentences pending revision.

Somveer Vs State of Hry. — Anticipatory Bail | Punjab & Haryana HC (2006)

¶1

Crl. Misc.No.25001-M of 2003

¶2

Present : Mr. Harbhagwan Singh, Sr.Advocate with Mr.J.S. Yadav, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Deepak Girotra, AAG, Haryana. Mr. R.K. Gupta, Advocate for respondent no.6.

¶3

Counsel for the State of Haryana prays for time to file a better

¶4

affidavit.

¶5

Adjourned to 18.12.2006.

¶6

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

¶7

Crl. Misc.No.60111-M of 2006

¶8

Major Ram

¶9

Vs. State of Punjab

¶10

Present : Mr. J.S. Virk, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Baath, AAG, Punjab

¶11

Prayer in this petition is, for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.145 dated 18.6.2002, registered under Sections 15/61/85 of the N.D.P.S. Act at Police Station Sadar, Muktsar, Distt. Muktsar.

¶12

On 28.9.2006, it was ordered that in case the petitioner appears

¶13

before the trial Court, on the date fixed before it, he would be released on interim bail to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

¶14

Counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner has surrendered before the trial Court and has been released on interim bail.

¶15

Counsel for the State of Punjab does not deny the aforementioned statement.

¶16

I have no reason to doubt the correctness of the statement

¶17

made by counsel for the petitioner. In view of the aforementioned statement, the order of this Court dated 28.9.2006 is made absolute. The petitioner shall, however, furnish fresh bail bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.

¶18

This petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶19

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

¶20

Crl. Misc.No.54608-M of 2006

¶21

Atma Singh

¶22

Vs. State of Punjab

¶23

Present : Ms.G.K. Mann, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Baath, AAG, Punjab. Mr. D.S. Pheruman, Advocate.

¶24

Prayer in this petition is, for grant of anticipatory bail in case

¶25

FIR No.59 dated 15.6.2002 registered under Sections

¶26

325,324,323,148,149,307 and 326 IPC at Police Station Mehta, Distt.Amritsar.

¶27

Vide order of this Court dated 8.9.2006, the petitioner was granted interim anticipatory bail.

¶28

Counsel for the complainant as also counsel for the State of Punjab submit that as challan has been presented, the present petition has been rendered infructuous. The petitioner would be now required to seek regular bail, from the trial Court.

¶29

As the challan has been presented on 24.10.2006, the present petition has been rendered infrcutuous. The petitioner would be now required to seek regular bail from the trial Court.

¶30

In case, the petitioner surrenders before the trial Court and files an application for regular bail, the same shall be considered and decided on the same day, in accordance with law.

¶31

Disposed of accordingly.

¶32

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

¶33

Crl. Misc.No.54560-M of 2006

¶34

Present : Mr. R.S. Budhwar, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. J.S. Toor, Addl.A.G. Haryana. Mr. D.K. Jangra, Advocate for the complainant.

¶35

The petitioners are directed to appear before the Investigating

¶36

Officer on 20.11.2006 at 10 AM.

¶37

The Investigating Officer shall also be present on the same date

¶38

and time.

¶39

Adjourned to 9.1.2007.

¶40

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

¶41

Crl. Misc.No.54302-M of 2006

¶42

Present : Mr. K.S. Boparai, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Baath, AAG, Punjab

¶43

The petitioner is directed to appear before the

¶44

Investigating Officer on 15.11.2006 at 10 AM.

¶45

The Investigating Officer shall also be present on the same date

¶46

and time.

¶47

Adjourned to 9.1.2007.

¶48

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

¶49

Crl. Misc.No.47842-M of 2006

¶50

Present : Mr.V.K. Jain, Sr.Advocate with Ms.Divya Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Baath, AAG, Punjab.

¶51

Mr. A.S. Syan, Advocate.

¶52

Adjourned to 13.12.2006.

¶53

Interim order to continue.

¶54

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

¶55

Crl. Misc.No.47410-M of 2006

¶56

Present : Mr.V.K. Jain, Sr.Advocate with Ms.Divya Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Baath, AAG, Punjab.

¶57

Mr. A.S. Syan, Advocate.

¶58

Adjourned to 13.12.2006.

¶59

Interim order to continue.

¶60

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

¶61

Crl. Misc.No.23884-M of 2006

¶62

Present : Mr. Navdeep Singh, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. B.S. Baath, AAG, Punjab

¶63

Prayer in this petition is, for grant of anticipatory bail in case

¶64

FIR No.33 dated 21.3.2006 registered under Sections 452,326,324,323,148,149 of the IPC at Police Station Dhariwal, Distt.Gurdaspur.

¶65

Vide order of this Court dated 25.4.2006, interim anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioners.

¶66

Counsel for the State of Punjab states that as the challan has been presented, the petitioners would, therefore, be required to seek regular bail, from the trial Court.

¶67

As the challan has been presented, the petitioners would now be required to seek regular bail from the trial Court.

¶68

This petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶69

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

¶70

Crl. Misc.No.21912-M of 2006

¶71

Present : Mr. R.K. Lamba, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Baath, AAG, Punjab Mr. Amit Sharma, Advocate.

¶72

On the request of counsel for the State of Punjab, adjourned to

¶73

13.11.2006.

¶74

The Senior Superintendent of Police, Muktsar is directed to be

¶75

present in person on the next date of hearing.

¶76

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

¶77

Crl. Misc.No.71081-M of2005

¶78

Amandeep Singh

¶79

Vs. State of Punjab and another

¶80

Present : Mr. S.S. Majithia, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Baath, AAG, Punjab. Mr.Gurpreet Singh Sachdeva, Advocate for the respondent no.2.

¶81

Counsel for the petitioner as also counsel for respondent no.2, the complainant are ad-idem that parties have resolved their matrimonial differences and have executed a written settlement dated 27.10.2006. The petitioner and respondent no.2 have agreed to part ways and for that purpose the petitioner has already paid a sum of Rs.1,30,000/- to respondent no.2. It is prayed that in view of the aforementioned facts, the order of this Court dated 23.1.2006 be made absolute.

¶82

Counsel for the State of Punjab has no objection.

¶83

In view of the facts noticed herein above, the order of this Court dated 23.1.2006 is made absolute, subject to the provisions of Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.

¶84

This petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶85

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

¶86

Crl. Misc.No.59690-M of 2005

¶87

Shalini Gupta

¶88

Vs. State of Haryana and others ...

¶89

Present : Mr. Vishal Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. J.S. Toor, Addl.A.G. Haryana.

¶90

Prayer in this petition is for cancellation of bail granted to respondents no.2 to 5 by the Court of Sessions Judge, Yamuna Nagar vide his order dated 1.10.2005.

¶91

Counsel for the petitioner contends that as articles of dowry were not recovered, the respondents were not entitled to the benefit of anticipatory bail and, therefore, the aforementioned order dated 1.10.2005 be set aside and the respondents be sent to jail.

¶92

Counsel for the respondents as also counsel for the State of Haryana submit that the challan has been presented. It is further argued by counsel for the petitioner/complainant that as no dowry articles have been recovered, there is no question of recovering them, therefore, the present petition be dismissed.

¶93

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper book.

¶94

The anticipatory bail was granted to the respondents on the basis of facts pleaded by them, the petitioner as also the prosecution. The order granting bail, whether regular or anticipatory can only be cancelled, if the said order had been obtained by fraud or some circumstances have come into existence, where the accused are alleged to have abused the concession of anticipatory bail. As no such fact exists, and as the respondents have

¶95

Crl.Misc.No.59690-M of 2005

¶96

-2-

¶97

already been granted regular bail, the present petition does not warrant acceptance. Dismissed.

¶98

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

¶99

In Crl. Rev.No.2125 of 2006

¶100

Present : Mr. Harinder Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Baath, AAG, Punjab

¶101

Prayer in this petition is for suspension of sentence during the pendency of this revision.

¶102

The revision was admitted on 19.10.2006 and is not likely to be heard in the near future.

¶103

After hearing counsel for the parties, I am of the considered opinion that in view of the facts and circumstances of the present case, the sentence imposed upon the petitioner should remain suspended during the pendency of the present revision.

¶104

Consequently, the sentence imposed upon the petitioner shall remain suspended, during the pendency of revision petition, subject to his furnishing adequate surety/bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, Ludhiana.

¶105

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

¶106

In Crl. Rev.No.2143 of 2006

¶107

Present : Mr. J.B.S. Gill, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Baath, AAG, Punjab

¶108

Prayer in this petition is for suspension of sentence during the pendency of this revision.

¶109

The revision was admitted on 23.10.2006 and is not likely to be heard in the near future.

¶110

¶111

¶112

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

¶113

Crl.Misc.No.64835 of 2006 In Crl. Rev.No.2134 of 2006

¶114

Present : Mr. R.K. Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Baath, AAG, Punjab

¶115

Prayer in this application is for suspension of sentence during the pendency of this revision.

¶116

The revision was admitted on 19.10.2006 and is not likely to be heard in the near future.

¶117

¶118

Consequently, the sentence imposed upon the applicantpetitioner shall remain suspended, during the pendency of revision petition, subject to his furnishing adequate surety/bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, Patiala.

¶119

C.M. stands disposed of accordingly.

¶120

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

¶121

Crl. Misc.No.60488-M of 2006

¶122

Varinder Kumar

¶123

Vs. State of Punjab

¶124

Present : Mr. Sushil Saini, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Baath, AAG, Punjab.

¶125

This order shall dispose of Crl.Misc.Nos.60488-M of 2006 and 61906-M of 2006.

¶126

The petitioners herein, namely; Varinder Kumar and Vaishno Dass and Vivek Kumar Saini, have inflicted injuries to Ramesh Pal, Suresh Pal, Anju Bala etc. The injuries inflicted by Varinder Kumar have been found to be simple, whereas injuries inflicted by Vaishno Dass were found to be grievous and with a sharp edged weapon. Vivek Kumar Saini is alleged to have inflicted an injury to the head of Anju Bala, punishable under Section 307 IPC.

¶127

Counsel for the petitioners contends that as the petitioners have been behind bars since 19.2.2006 i.e. a period of about nine months and as investigation is complete and challan has been presented, the petitioners be released on bail. It is further argued that the injured have not suffered any disability, permanent or otherwise and as the trial is likely to be protracted, the petitioners be released on bail.

¶128

Counsel for the State of Punjab states that as the petitioners inflicted serious injuries, as is apparent from the FIR and the medical record, they be denied bail. It is however, not denied on instructions from ASI, Ramesh Kumar, P.S. Taragrah, Distt.Gurdaspur that none of the injured have suffered any disability, permanent or otherwise.

¶129

Crl.Misc.No.60488-M of 2006

¶130

-2-

¶131

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

¶132

paper book.

¶133

The petitioners have been behind bars since 9.2.2006. Challan has been presented and 2 PWs have been examined. The injured have not suffered any disability, serious or otherwise, on account of the injuries. The prosecution has cited 22 witnesses and, therefore,the trial is likely to be protracted. The petitioners cannot be incarcerated indefinitely.

¶134

Counsel for the State of Punjab has not expressed any apprehension that if released on bail, the petitioners would subvert the trial and/or try to win over the witnesses.

¶135

Bail to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, Gurdaspur.

¶136

Nothing stated herein shall be construed to be an expression of

¶137

opinion on the merits of the case.

¶138

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

¶139

Crl. Misc.No.61906-M of 2006

¶140

Vaishno Dass and another Vs. State of Punjab

¶141

Present : Mr. Sushil Saini, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. B.S. Baath, AAG, Punjab.

¶142

For orders, see Crl.Misc.No.60488-M of 2006.

¶143

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

¶144

Crl. Misc.No.60147-M of 2006

¶145

Somveer

¶146

Vs. State of Haryana

¶147

Present : Mr. Dhirinder Chopra, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. J.S. Toor, Addl.A.G. Haryana.

¶148

Prayer in this petition is for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.91 dated 19.3.1994 registered under Section 395 IPC at Police Station Sadar Bahadurgarh, Distt.Rohtak.

¶149

The FIR is of the year 1994. Two of the petitioner's coaccused, have passed away, whereas two others, who were named in the FIR, have been acquitted by the trial Court.

¶150

Counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated. He is not named in the FIR, whereas his co-accused, who were named have been acquitted. It is contended that the petitioner is in custody since 8.5.2006 and as he has no other case pending against him, he be released on bail.

¶151

Counsel for the State of Haryana, on the other hand submits that the petitioner has been arrested after a period of 12 years. The fact that the petitioner's name is not mentioned in the FIR or that his co-accused have been acquitted, would not enure to his benefit, as his role in the offence would be determined by the trial Court.

¶152

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

¶153

paper book.

¶154

It is not denied that two of the petitioner's co-accused have passed away and two have been acquitted. The two acquitted co-accused

¶155

Crl.Misc.No.60147-M of 2006

¶156

-2-

¶157

were named in the FIR and recoveries were effected from them. Though a recovery of a sum of Rs.300/- was effected from the petitioner, he was not named in the FIR and even otherwise, his co-accused have already been released on regular bail. The challan has been presented and the prosecution has cited 16 witnesses. The trial is likely to be protracted. Further incarceration of the petitioner is not warranted.

¶158

Counsel for the State of Haryana has not expressed any apprehension that if released on bail, the petitioner would subvert the trial and/or try to win over the witnesses.

¶159

Bail to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, Jhajjar.

¶160

Nothing stated herein shall be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

¶161

As the petitioner appears to be resident of Madhya Pradesh, the trial Court, while releasing the petitioner on bail may impose such terms and conditions as it may deem fit. The trial Court shall also make every endeavour, to dispose of the trial expeditiously.

¶162

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

¶163

Crl. Misc.No.60079-M of 2006

¶164

Present : Mr. Bipan Ghai, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. J.S. Toor, Addl.A.G. Haryana.

¶165

Adjourned to 8.12.2006.

¶166

Meanwhile, the trial Court shall make every endeavour to

¶167

record the statement of the prosecutrix on 27.11.2006.

¶168

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

¶169

Crl. Misc.No.46151-M of 2006

¶170

Ravinder Kumar @ Babba

¶171

Vs. State of Punjab

¶172

Present : Mrs.Baljit K. Mann, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Baath, AAG, Punjab.

¶173

Prayer in this petition is, for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.88 dated 25.6.2006, registered under Sections 326,324,323,341,506,148,149 of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Nurmahal, Distt.Jalandhar.

¶174

Vide order of this Court dated 7.8.2006, it was directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioner, he shall be released on bail, subject to the conditions enumerated therein.

¶175

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has joined investigation, therefore, his custodial interrogation is not required.

¶176

Counsel for the State of Punjab, does not deny the aforementioned fact and states that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required.

¶177

In view of what has been stated above, the order of this Court dated 7.8.2006 is made absolute, subject to the provisions of Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.

¶178

This petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶179

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

¶180

Crl. Misc.No.50201-M of 2006

¶181

Kailash Singh

¶182

Vs. State of Punjab

¶183

Present : Mr.K.S. Rekhi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Baath, AAG, Punjab.

¶184

Prayer in this petition is, for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.113 dated 22.6.2006, registered under Sections 406,420,467,468,471,506,120-B of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Sarabha Nagar, Ludhiana.

¶185

Vide order of this Court dated 24.8.2006, it was directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioner, he shall be released on bail, subject to the conditions enumerated therein.

¶186

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has joined investigation, therefore, his custodial interrogation is not required.

¶187

Counsel for the State of Punjab, does not deny the aforementioned fact and states that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required.

¶188

In view of what has been stated above, the order of this Court dated 24.8.2006 is made absolute, subject to the provisions of Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.

¶189

This petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶190

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

¶191

Crl. Misc.No.57196-M of 2006

¶192

Gurinder Pal Kaur Vs. State of Punjab

¶193

Present : Mr. Balram Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Baath, AAG, Punjab.

¶194

Prayer in this petition is, for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.57 dated 18.4.2006, registered under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station B. Division, Amritsar.

¶195

Vide order of this Court dated 19.9.2006, it was directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioner, she shall be released on bail, subject to the conditions enumerated therein.

¶196

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has joined investigation, therefore, her custodial interrogation is not required.

¶197

Counsel for the State of Punjab, does not deny the aforementioned fact and states that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required.

¶198

In view of what has been stated above, the order of this Court dated 19.9.2006 is made absolute, subject to the provisions of Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.

¶199

This petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶200

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

¶201

Crl. Misc.No.58996-M of 2006

¶202

Parampal

¶203

Vs. State of Punjab ...

¶204

Present : Mr. J.S. Brar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Baath, AAG, Punjab.

¶205

Prayer in this petition is, for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.257 dated 25.7.2006, registered under Sections 307/427 of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station City Moga, Distt. Moga.

¶206

Vide order of this Court dated 28.9.2006, it was directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioner, he shall be released on bail, subject to the conditions enumerated therein.

¶207

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has joined investigation, therefore, his custodial interrogation is not required.

¶208

Counsel for the State of Punjab, does not deny the aforementioned fact and states that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required.

¶209

In view of what has been stated above, the order of this Court dated 28.9.2006 is made absolute, subject to the provisions of Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.

¶210

This petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶211

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

¶212

Crl. Misc.No.60519-M of 2006

¶213

Seema Devi and another

¶214

Vs. State of Punjab

¶215

Present : Mr. Hemender Goswami, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. B.S. Baath, AAG, Punjab

¶216

Prayer in this petition is, for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.68 dated 26.4.2004, registered under Sections 376,328,323,506,120-B of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Division No.7, Ludhiana.

¶217

Vide order of this Court dated 29.9.2006, the petitioner was directed to surrender before the trial Court, within a fortnight, whereupon, he would be released on interim anticipatory bail, to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

¶218

Counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners have surrendered before the trial court on 28.10.2006 and have been released on interim bail.

¶219

Counsel for the State of Punjab, on instructions from Head Constable Gurnam Singh, does not deny the correctness of the aforementioned statement.

¶220

In view of the aforementioned facts, the order of this Court dated 29.9.2006 is made absolute. The petitioner shall,however, furnish fresh bail bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

¶221

This petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶222

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

¶223

Crl. Misc.No.1133-M of 2006

¶224

Present : Mr. C.S. Bakshi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Baath, AAG, Punjab

¶225

On request, adjourned to 17.11.2006.

¶226

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

¶227

Crl. Misc.No. -M of 2006

¶228

Present : Mr. C.S. Bakshi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Baath, AAG, Punjab.

¶229

To come up alongwith Crl.Misc.No.1133-M of 2006 on

¶230

17.11.2006.

¶231

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

¶232

Crl. Misc.No.

¶233

Present : Mr., Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Baath, AAG, Punjab Mr. J.S. Toor, Addl.A.G. Haryana.

¶234

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

¶235

Crl. Misc.No.

¶236

Present : Mr., Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Baath, AAG, Punjab Mr. J.S. Toor, Addl.A.G. Haryana.

¶237

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

¶238

Crl. Misc.No.

¶239

Present : Mr., Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Baath, AAG, Punjab Mr. J.S. Toor, Addl.A.G. Haryana.

¶240

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

¶241

Crl. Misc.No.

¶242

Present : Mr., Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Baath, AAG, Punjab Mr. J.S. Toor, Addl.A.G. Haryana.

¶243

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

¶244

Crl. Misc.No.

¶245

Present : Mr., Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Baath, AAG, Punjab Mr. J.S. Toor, Addl.A.G. Haryana.

¶246

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

¶247

Crl. Misc.No.

¶248

Present : Mr., Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Baath, AAG, Punjab Mr. J.S. Toor, Addl.A.G. Haryana.

¶249

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

¶250

Crl. Misc.No.

¶251

Present : Mr., Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Baath, AAG, Punjab Mr. J.S. Toor, Addl.A.G. Haryana.

¶252

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

¶253

Crl. Misc.No.

¶254

Present : Mr., Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Baath, AAG, Punjab Mr. J.S. Toor, Addl.A.G. Haryana.

¶255

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

¶256

Crl. Misc.No.

¶257

Present : Mr., Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Baath, AAG, Punjab Mr. J.S. Toor, Addl.A.G. Haryana.

¶258

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

¶259

Crl. Misc.No.

¶260

Present : Mr., Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Baath, AAG, Punjab Mr. J.S. Toor, Addl.A.G. Haryana.

¶261

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

¶262

Crl. Misc.No.

¶263

Present : Mr., Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Baath, AAG, Punjab Mr. J.S. Toor, Addl.A.G. Haryana.

¶264

6.11.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE

Somveer v. State of Hry.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Somveer v. State of Hry.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vinod Kumar Sharma Vs State of Hry. & Ors.

Om Parkash & Ors. Vs State of Haryana

Birmati Vs St of Hry etc.

Varinder Kumar Vs State of Pb.

Parampal Singh Vs State of Punjab

Gurinder Pal Kaur Vs State of Punjab