This judgment deals with an application for anticipatory bail. The High Court rejected the plea, citing serious injuries to police personnel and the petitioner's involvement in other criminal cases, finding no grounds for bail.
Application for anticipatory bail dismissed; documents taken on record subject to exceptions.
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-14805 of 2013 (O&M)
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Crl.Misc.No.M-14805 of 2013 (O&M) Date of decision: 21.05.2013
Vinay @ Tinku
... Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana
... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.C.PURI
Present : Mr.Karan Bhardwaj, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Amit Kaushik, Sr.DAG, Haryana.
K.C.Puri, J.
Crl.Misc.No.27096 of 2013
Crl.Misc.application stands allowed. Documents are taken on record subject to all just exceptions. Crl.Misc.No.M-14085 of 2013
Vinay @ Tinku-petitioner has applied for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.62 dated 8.2.2013 under Sections 186, 332, 353, 307, 34 IPC and 25 and 54 of the Arms Act, 1959, registered at Police Station Jagadhari, District Yamuna Nagar.
As per allegation of the prosecution, ASI Yashpal, Incharge Police Post Buria made a statement that he along with HC Lakhwinder Masih and EASI Kehar Singh were present for patrolling and they received a secret information that Vinay @ Tinku (present petitioner) is possessing illegal weapons and has gone towards his house and if the raid is made, he can be apprehended along with weapons. ASI Yashpal along with police
Crl.Misc.No.M-14805 of 2013 (O&M)
2
party went towards Johri pura Mohalla, then the petitioner met them and ASI Yashpal tried to apprehend but the petitioner took out a pistol from his right side and with an intention to kill ASI, kept it on his left ear. ASI Yashpal immediately caught hold of his hand and then petitioner hit him with pistol on his right side of his head and raised lalkara that Sourabh, Vishal and Prince come immediately as he has been caught hold by the police and teach them a lesson for catching him. In the meantime, Sourabh son of Ramnath, Ex MC Visha, Prince, Shiv Dayal father of Tinku, mother of Tinku, chachi of Tinku, Sunil Kamboj came with dandas and lathis in their hands and Sunil hit baseball bat on the head of HC Lakhwinder Masih and Lakhwinder Masih fell down then Shiv Dayal hit him with danda in his hand which hit him on the chest and Sorabh hit with danda in his hand on ASI Kehar Singh on the back side of his head, and mother of Tinku and Chachi, Vishal, Prince residents of Mohalla Johrapuri hit him and HC Lakhwinder Masih and ASI Kehar Singh with slaps and also gave fist blows to them and they cried then people passing in the way came there and upon seeing them, the aforesaid accused persons ran away from the spot alongwith their respective weapons.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner earlier moved an application for anticipatory bail before the Sessions Judge and notice of two days was ordered to be given. It is contended that ASI Yashpal along with other have come in plain clothes and have manhandled with the petitioner and others including his wife. It is submitted that more than 300 persons have filed their affidavits in support
Crl.Misc.No.M-14805 of 2013 (O&M)
3
of the contention of the petitioner. The petitioner is falsely implicated and he is entitled to concession of bail.
I have carefully considered the said submission but do not find any force in that submission. The geniuses of the affidavits is to be adjudged during the course of the trial. Three police officials have also received injuries and medical reports are there. It is not disputed during the course of arguments that petitioner is an accused in other two criminal cases.
The weapon of offence is yet to be recovered. Otherwise also, in case the police party is allowed to manhandled in such a manner in that case, the police force cannot function properly.
So, taking into the account of all the circumstances, no ground
for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is made out.
Dismissed.
21.05.2013 sd
[ K.C.Puri ] Judge
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail is maintainable in a case involving injury to police officers and possession of illegal weapons.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Vinay @ Tinku
State of Haryana
K.C. Puri
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
