The petitioner sought interim bail under section 439 CrPC to attend a marriage. The court rejected the plea because the marriage beneficiary was a cousin, not a sister, and allowing bail posed a risk to prosecution witnesses.
No interim bail 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.
Crl. Misc. No.M-3464 of 2012
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc. No. M-3464 of 2012 (O&M) Date of Decision: February 8th, 2012
Sagar Mann .... Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana
.... Respondent
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJENDER SINGH MALIK
1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
Present Mr. Amit Shivrain, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Sagar Deswal, DAG, Haryana, for the State assisted by Mr. Akashdeep Singh, Advocate, for the complainant.
VIJENDER SINGH MALIK, J.
By way of this petition, brought under the provisions of section 439 Cr. P.C. Sagar Mann, the petitioner has sought interim bail in a case registered by way of FIR No. 247 dated 29.8.2011 at Police Station Kundli, for an offence punishable under section 302 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and section 25 of the Arms Act, so as to attend the marriage of Sonia.
On verification, learned State counsel has found that Sonia is not the real sister of the petitioner and that she is only the cousin sister of the petitioner. He has further submitted that two brothers of Sonia are there to attend to the ceremonies of the marriage. He has further
Crl. Misc. No.M-3464 of 2012
2
submitted that the case against the petitioner is very serious and allowing him bail even for a short period would be inviting harm to the prosecution witnesses.
Keeping in view the fact that Sonia is not the real sister of the petitioner and there are number of persons in the family back home to look after the ceremonies of the marriage as also the other facts submitted by learned State counsel, I do not find the petitioner to be entitled to the concession of interim bail. The petition is, consequently, dismissed.
(VIJENDER SINGH MALIK) JUDGE
February 8th, 2012 som
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to interim bail to attend his cousin sister’s marriage?
Whether allowing interim bail for a short period would harm the prosecution witnesses?
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Sagar Mann
State of Haryana
Vijender Singh Malik
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
