Single judge dismissed petitioner's plea for extending interim temporary bail on the ground of wife's medical emergency, noting failure to undergo scheduled operation. No extension granted.
Extension of interim temporary bail not granted.
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.
Manoj Kumar
State of Haryana
Versus
Crl. Misc. No.45173 of 2011 in/and Crl. Misc. No.19780-M of 2011
Present: Mr. Rajesh Lamba, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Ms. Sushma Chopra, Addl. AG, Haryana.
Petitioner seeks concession of interim temporary bail on the ground that his wife requires to be operated upon. Believing petitioner, he had been granted concession of interim temporary bail for a period of 15 days but on account of certain medical complications, his wife was not operated upon. Thereafter, the petitioner came with a date of operation as 29.08.2011. Case was adjourned to find out if the wife has undergone operation so that relief could be granted to the petitioner. It is reported that, despite having been admitted in hospital for operation for 29.08.2011 she was not operated upon. It has now been submitted by counsel for the petitioner that the operation is fixed for 5th or 6th of September, 2011.
Taking into consideration totality of the circumstances, I do not find any ground to grant the concession of interim temporary bail to the petitioner.
Dismissed at this stage.
No extention can be granted to the petitioner of the interim
temporary bail.
(M.M.S. BEDI) JUDGE
01.09.2011 manju
Manoj Kumar
State of Haryana
M.M.S. BEDI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
