The petitioner sought anticipatory bail in a case involving sections of the IPC. The court dismissed the petition noting the alleged compromise was under duress and the petitioner faced another ongoing trial without cooperation.
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.
1
Crl.Misc.No. M-18751 of 2012
201 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Crl.Misc.No. M-18751 of 2012 Date of decision : 22.8.2012
Parveen Petitioner v.
Hry. State Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN
Present: Mr. Rakesh Nagpal, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. BS Saini, Sr. DAG, Haryana assisted by Mr. Ajaypal Singh, Advocate
JITENDRA CHAUHAN,J.
This petition has been filed by the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 21 dated 3.2.2012 under sections 367/343/195/506/34 IPC registered at Police Station Rania, District Sirsa.
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the complainant has made a statement before the police on 19.5.2012 that the matter stand compromised.
Petitioner has joined interrogation and no custodial interrogation is required.
On the other hand, learned State counsel states that on 3.7.2012, when bail application of co-accused Subhash was taken up, the complainant made a statement before the Ld. District Judge that the compromise was made under coercion and duress and not with his free will.
Ld. State counsel, on instructions from SI Shiv Narain, P.S. Rania, further states that petitioner is involved in three FIRs, out of which in 2 FIRs , he stands acquitted by extending the benefit of doubt and
2
Crl.Misc.No. M-18751 of 2012
in FIR No. 294 dated 2.2.2011 under sections 147/149/430/506 IPC, registered at P.S. Rania, he is facing trial. The vehicle and weapon of offence are yet to be recovered and petitioner is not co-operating with the investigating agency.
In view of the above, no case for admitting the petitioner to bail is made out. Dismissed.
(JITENDRA CHAUHAN) JUDGE
22.8.2012 MS
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in the pending investigation.
Whether the alleged compromise in the case stands valid or was made under duress.
Parveen
Haryana State
Jitendra Chauhan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
