Allowed

Ravi Alias Rubi v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC27 May 2013CRM-M/11440/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab & Haryana granted regular bail to the petitioner in a murder case. The court held that while allegations against the accused of catching hold of a deceased are serious, nothing was discovered in pursuance of the confessional statement, justifying bail.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner ordered to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.30,000/- with one surety.

Ravi Alias Rubi Vs State of Haryana — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

Crl. Misc. No.M- 11440 of 2013

¶2

----1--

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

¶4

AT CHANDIGARH

¶5

Crl. Misc. No.M- 11440 of 2013

¶6

Date of decision :27.05.2013

Ravi alias Rubi

......Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJENDER SINGH MALIK

¶13

Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶14

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶15

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶16

Present: Mr. Raman Sharma,Advocate for the petitioner.

¶17

Mr. Rajat Mor,DAG, Haryana for the respondent.

¶18

VIJENDER SINGH MALIK , J.(ORAL)

¶19

Ravi alias Rubi, the petitioner seeks regular bail in a case registered by way of FIR No. 282 dated 25.07.2012, for an offence punishable under sections 148, 302 read with section 149 IPC.

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the FIR, three persons were murdered in village Mandauthi for which Nafe Singh, husband of the complainant Ram Ratti and her

¶21

Crl. Misc. No.M- 11440 of 2013 ----2--

¶22

two sons were challaned. According to him, her husband and her son Kaptan were on bail on the date of occurrence i.e. 25.07.2012. On that day, she saw Nafe Singh running, followed by Nasib, Rinku, Anil, Khadu and Vinod. According to him, Anil, Vinod and Khadu had caught Nafe Singh and Rinku gave a dav (a heavy wood cutting instrument) blow and Anil had hit him with brick.

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that subsequently she made a supplementary statement Annexure P-3 where she named Ravi alias Rubi also. According to him, the role attributed to Ravi alias Rubi in the supplementary statement is also of catching hold of Nafe Singh. He further submits that the police then recorded a confessional statement of the accused in this regard but nothing was discovered in pursuance of that confessional/disclosure statement.

¶24

Learned State counsel, on the other hand, submits that the allegations against the petitioner are quite serious and specific. According to him, though the complainant could not name the petitioner in the FIR, yet after few hours, she named him and alleged that he had caught hold of her husband.

¶25

The first aspect that becomes clear is that the allegations against the petitioner are of catching hold of the deceased. Earlier in the FIR there had been allegation against

¶26

Crl. Misc. No.M- 11440 of 2013 ----3--

¶27

Vinod, a brother of the petitioner and thereafter his other brother Ravi alias Rubi has also been implicated as having caught hold of Nafe Singh. No blow is attributed to the petitioner as having been given to Nafe Singh. Earlier three persons were alleged to have caught hold of Nafe Singh and thereafter in supplementary statement four names were given for catching hold of Nafe Singh. The petitioner, who is alleged to have made a statement before the police could not get anything recovered which may connect him with the crime. The petitioner is in custody since 30.07.2012.

¶28

Keeping in view the aforesaid circumstances but without commenting on the merits of the case, I find the petitioner to be entitled to bail. The petition is ,consequently ,allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.30,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhajjar.

¶29

(VIJENDER SINGH MALIK) JUDGE

¶30

May 27, 2013 dinesh

Ravi Alias Rubi v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravi Alias Rubi 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gladstone Electronics Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. Vs India Bulls Financial Services Ltd.

Abhijeet Singh @ Ankur Likhari Vs State of Punjab

Gurbhajan Singh Vs State of Punjab

Balwinder Singh & Anr. Vs State of Punjab

Balwinder Singh Vs State of Haryana

Ravneet Singh Vs State of Punjab