This brief order rejects the petitioners' application for anticipatory bail. The bench held that no case is made out at this stage, noting that investigation continues based on injuries alleged by the victims.
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.
204 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Crl.Misc.No. M- 16376 of 2012 Date of decision : 26.7.2012
Padam & Ors. Petitioners v.
State of Haryana Respondent
CORAM HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN
Present: Mr. TS Sangha, Senior Advocate with Mr. Narinder Singh, Advocate for the petitioners Mr. BS Saini, Sr. DAG, Haryana
JITENDRA CHAUHAN,J.
Learned State counsel, on instructions from the Investigating Officer, submits that in the statements of the injured Mohan, Lakshman and Brij Kishore, it is mentioned that petitioners caused injuries to them with sharp edged weapons. The investigation, in the version rendered by the injured, is going on.
No case is made out to grant anticipatory bail at this stage.
Dismissed.
(JITENDRA CHAUHAN) JUDGE
26.7.2012 MS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners given the pending investigation into their alleged assault with sharp-edged weapons.
State of Haryana
Jitendra Chauhan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
