Allowed

Dildar @ Shahrukh v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC2 Apr 2013CRM-M/10193/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted regular bail to a juvenile petitioner in a criminal case, noting his alleged minor role, existing anticipatory bail for a co-accused, and the prolonged trial timeline due to the absence of a final police report.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail granted to the petitioner upon furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Yamuna Nagar.

Dildar @ Shahrukh Vs State of Haryana — Bail and Remand | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

¶2

CRM No.M-10193 of 2013

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM No.M-10193 of 2013(O&M) Date of Decision:02.04.2013

¶5

Dildar @ Shahrukh .....Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Haryana .....Respondent

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR.

¶9

Present: Mr.R.S.Mamli, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶10

Mr.Ajay Ghangas, Addl. Advocate General, Haryana, for the respondent-State.

¶11

¶12

MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR , J.(oral)

¶13

Petitioner-Dildar alias Shahrukh, minor son of Aslam Khan, has directed the instant petition for the grant of regular bail in a case registered against him along with his other co-accused, vide FIR No.22 dated 31.01.2013, for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 148, 149, 323, 324, 341, 452, 506 and 307 IPC, by the police of Police Station Chhachhrauli, District Yamuna Nagar, invoking the provisions of Section 439 Cr.P.C. read with Section 53 of the Juvenile Justice(Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2000.

¶14

Notice of the petition was issued to the State.

¶15

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, going

¶16

through the record with their valuable help and after deep consideration of the entire matter, to my mind, the present petition for regular bail

¶17

CRM No.M-10193 of 2013

¶18

¶19

deserves to be accepted in this context.

¶20

It is not a matter of dispute that, neither any injury nor any other specific role is attributed to the present petitioner. He is stated to be juvenile. Moreover, he was arrested on 02.02.2013. Since then he is in judicial custody and no useful purpose would be served in further detaining him in jail. Ashraf, co-accused of the petitioner, has already been granted the concession of anticipatory bail by this Court, by way of separate order of the even date under similar circumstances. There is no history of his previous involvement in any other criminal case. Even, since the police has not submitted the final police report(challan), so, the conclusion of trial will naturally take a long time.

¶21

In the light of aforesaid reasons, taking into consideration the totality of other facts and circumstances, emanating from the record, as discussed here-in-above and without commenting further anything on merits, lest it may prejudice the case of either side during the course of trial of the main case, the instant petition for regular bail is hereby accepted. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing adequate bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Yamuna Nagar.

¶22

April 02, 2013 seema

¶23

( M EHINDER S INGH S ULLAR) JUDGE

Dildar @ Shahrukh v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dildar @ Shahrukh v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Zulfikar Ali and Anr. Vs State of Punjab

Brij Mohan and Anr. Vs State of Haryana

Deepak Kumar Vs State of Punjab & Anr.

Gulab Singh Vs State of Hy.

Sukhdev Singh & Ors. Vs State of Punjab

Rajwinder Kaur and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.