Allowed

Sanjay Kumar v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC18 Dec 2013CRM-M/29292/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc.No.M-29292 of 2013, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana allowed the petitioner's bail petition. The court granted bail to Sanjay Kumar, who was behind bars since May 2013, after dismissing the state's argument that he was involved in other serious offences contrary to record. Bail was granted subject to furnishing bonds.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to be released on bail during the pendency of the trial subject to furnishing bail bonds.

Sanjay Kumar Vs State of Haryana — Bail and Remand | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

Criminal Misc.No.M-29292 of 2013

¶2

{1}

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Criminal Misc.No.M-29292 of 2013 Date of Decision: 18^th December, 2013

Sanjay Kumar

.. Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana

.. Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI

¶11

Present: Mr.A.S.Sullar, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr.Chetan Sharma, AAG, Haryana.

¶13

¶14

Naresh Kumar Sanghi, J.

¶15

Prayer in this petition is for grant of regular bail to petitioner Sanjay Kumar who has been booked for having committed the offences punishable under Sections 147, 323, 365 and 367 read with Section 149, IPC, in a case arising out of FIR No.206, dated 23.03.2013, registered at Police Station, City, Sirsa.

¶16

Learned counsel contends that the maximum sentence of imprisonment prescribed under Section 367, IPC, is ten years and the petitioner is behind the bars from 31.05.2013; that the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirsa, has wrongly averred in para No.6 of the impugned order that the petitioner is involved in so many other serious offences.

¶17

Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from SI Rajbir Singh, Police Station, Sirsa, very fairly concedes that the petitioner is neither required nor involved in any other case.

¶18

Sharma Seema 2013.12.19 10:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶19

Criminal Misc.No.M-29292 of 2013

¶20

{2}

¶21

However, he has opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner on the premise that serious offence was committed by the petitioner.

¶22

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and with their able assistance gone through the material available on record.

¶23

The petitioner is behind the bars from 31.05.2013. The maximum sentence prescribed under Section 367, IPC, is for 10 years for which the petitioner has been charged. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirsa, had dismissed the petition for grant of bail mainly on the ground that the petitioner was involved in several serious matters and the said findings is contrary to the material available on record.

¶24

Keeping in view the period of incarceration and the part attributed to the petitioner, the present petition is allowed. Petitioner-Sanjay Kumar s/o Balwan, r/o village Jamal, Tehsil and District, Sirsa, is ordered to be released on bail during the pendency of the trial of the present case subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, Sirsa.

¶25

December 18, 2013 Seema

¶26

(Naresh Kumar Sanghi)

¶27

Judge

¶28

Sharma Seema 2013.12.19 10:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

Sanjay Kumar v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Kumar 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

Gurpreet Kaur Vs Bikramjit Singh and Ors.

Maninder Kaur Vs State of Punjab

Balkar Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Pawan Kumar Vs State of Haryana

V. Subramaniam Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Satnam Singh Vs State of Punjab & Ors.