Single judge granted regular bail to the petitioner in a murder and arms offence case upon acceptance of factual assertions regarding the petitioner's initial innocence and identity of evidence across cases, without adjudicating merits.
Petitioner released on regular bail to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Crl. Misc. No.M-17264 of 2011 (O&M)
Vikas Manchanda @ Vikas Kailawala Vs. State of Haryana
Present : Mr. J.S. Bedi, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Shekhar Mudgal, A.A.G., Haryana.
Mr. Sumit Sharma, Advocate for the complainant.
AJAY TEWARI, J. (ORAL)
This petition has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case F.I.R. No.258 dated 01.09.2009 registered under Sections 302, 34, 120-B IPC and Sections 25, 54 and 59 of the Arms Act at Police Station Ambala Cantt., District Ambala.
On 26.07.2011 the following contention was noticed:-
“Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that originally in FIR No.258 dated 01.09.2009 the petitioner was found by the police to be not involved and has been held to be innocent. However, in the subsequent FIR No.98 one of the co-accused gave a statement during police custody that in fact the petitioner had financed both the occurrences. It was in fact on the basis of that statement the petitioner was arrested in both the cases and in that FIR the petitioner has been granted regular bail by this Court on 26.04.2011.
In view of the fact that the evidence in both the cases is identical viz. the statement of a coaccused that the petitioner had financed both the occurrences, learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that he may be released on bail in the present case also. ”
Crl. Misc. No.M-17264 of 2011 (O&M)
-2-
Learned Assistant Advocate General on instructions from ASI Rishi Pal has accepted these factual assertions.
Learned counsel for the complainant has not in a position to deny these facts though he has argued that this is a case of gang war where two persons have been murdered in the broad daylight.
Be that as it may, in view of the facts brought out above it would not be possible for this Court to deny bail to the petitioner in the present case.
In the circumstances, without going into the merit of the case, I deem it appropriate to release the petitioner on regular bail to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate.
Ordered accordingly.
Petition stands disposed of.
( AJAY TEWARI ) August 25, 2011 JUDGE ashish
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail in light of conflicting accusations regarding financing the occurrences.
Whether the existing evidence allows denial of bail claims in a gang war case involving murder.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Vikas Manchanda @ Vikas Kailawala
State of Haryana
Ajay Tewari
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
