Allowed

Tofiq & Ors. v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC21 Dec 2013CRM-M/39317/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed a petition for anticipatory bail to Tofiq and others booked for IPC offences. The court observed police inaction and the petitioners' cooperation, making interim directions absolute and requiring compliance with Section 438 conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; interim directions made absolute; petitioners directed to continue joining investigation and comply with Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

Tofiq & Ors. Vs State of Haryana — Anticipatory Bail | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

Criminal Misc.No.M-39317 of 2013

¶2

{1}

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Criminal Misc.No.M-39317 of 2013 Date of Decision: 21^st December, 2013

Tofiq and Others

.. Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana

.. Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI

¶11

Present: Mr. Sarfraj Hussain, Advocate, for the petitioners.

¶12

Mr.Chetan Sharma, AAG, Haryana.

¶13

¶14

Naresh Kumar Sanghi, J.

¶15

Prayer in this petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to petitioners, namely, Tofiq, Ikhlash, Arshad and Saddik who have been booked for having committed the offences punishable under Sections 323 and 506 read with Section 34, IPC, in a case arising out of FIR No.112, dated 21.2.2013, registered at Police Station, Nuh, District Mewat.

¶16

Learned counsel contends that in spite of passing of ten months, the police is not attempting to arrest the petitioners but now the pressure is mounted to arrest them; that all the injuries allegedly received by Jumma, Ummar and Rahisan were found to be simple; and that in compliance of the order dated 29.11.2013 passed by this Court, the petitioners have joined the investigation and co-operated with the investigation.

¶17

Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Surinder Singh, Police Station, Nuh, District Mewat, very fairly

¶18

Sharma Seema 2013.12.21 14:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶19

{2}

¶20

Criminal Misc.No.M-39317 of 2013

¶21

concedes that the petitioners had joined the investigation and no more required for custodial interrogation in the present case.

¶22

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

¶23

In view of the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, the present petition is allowed. Interim directions issued by this Court vide order dated 29.11.2013 are made absolute.

¶24

The petitioners shall continue to join the investigation as and when required by the Investigating Agency and abide by all the conditions laid down in Section 438(2), Cr.P.C.

¶25

December 21, 2013 seema

¶26

(Naresh Kumar Sanghi) Judge

¶27

Sharma Seema 2013.12.21 14:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

Tofiq & Ors. v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tofiq & Ors. 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

Arjun Vs State of Haryana

Rajdeep Singh @ Ginni Vs State of Haryana

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

Vineet Rai Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Purshotam Verma and Anr. Vs State of Haryana and Anr.

Radha Rani Vs State of Haryana