Allowed

Satnam Singh and Anr. v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC27 May 2014CRM-M/10227/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail matter, the High Court allowed a petition for anticipatory bail filed by petitioners Nos.1 to 3 and 5 against charges of multiple offences. The court accepted the petition and made the interim bail granted by a co-ordinate bench absolute for these specific petitioners.

What did the court decide?

The petition for anticipatory bail filed by petitioners Nos.1 to 3 and 5 was accepted and the interim bail granted by a co-ordinate bench on March 25, 2014, was made absolute.

Satnam Singh and Anr. Vs State of Haryana — Anticipatory Bail | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

CRM No.M-10227 of 2014 (O&M)

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM No.M-10227 of 2014 (O&M) Date of Decision:- 27.05.2014

¶5

Satnam Singh and others

.....Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana

.....Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR

¶11

Present: Mr. D.P.S. Bajwa, Advocate, for the petitioners.

¶12

Mr. H.S. Deol, Additional Advocate General, Haryana for the State.

¶13

¶14

MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR , J.(oral)

¶15

As is evident from the record that, the petition for pre-arrest

¶16

bail, filed on behalf of main accused Amir Singh son of Maan Singh (petitioner No.4), has already been dismissed, by this Court.

¶17

Petitioner Nos.1 to 3 and 5, have preferred the instant petition for the grant of anticipatory bail, in a case registered against them, vide FIR No.193 dated 24.05.2013, on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 341, 506, 307, 326 and 325 read with Section 34 IPC, by the police of Police Station Nissing, District Karnal.

¶18

Kumar Naresh 2014.05.29 14:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶19

CRM No.M-10227 of 2014 (O&M) -2-

¶20

Notice of the petition was issued to the respondent.

¶21

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, going through the record with their valuable assistance and after considering the entire matter deeply, to my mind, the present petition for anticipatory bail deserves to be accepted in this context.

¶22

During the course of preliminary hearing, the following order was passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court (K.C. Puri, J.) on March 25, 2014: -

¶23

“As per allegation of the prosecution, Amir Singh s/o Maan Singh petitioner No.4 gave a lathi blow on the head of Lovpreet complainant, which injury was declared grievous in nature. He is seeking anticipatory bail. In view of the gravity of offence, he is not entitled to the concession of anticipatory bail.

¶24

So, application of Amir Singh s/o Maan Singh – petitioner No.4, for grant of anticipatory bail stands dismissed.

¶25

Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that Satnam Singh – petitioner No.1 has been attributed only lalkara, whereas simple injury has been attributed to other applicants namely, Amir Singh @ Amar Singh s/o Satnam Singh – petitioner No.2, Karabir @ Karan Singh petitioner No.3 and Jarnail Singh petitioner No.5. It is further submitted that they have been declared innocent and have been summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C.

¶26

So, notice of motion qua petitioners No. 1, 2, 3 and 5 for 27.5.2014.

¶27

In the meantime, Satnam Singh – petitioner No.1, Amir Singh @ Amar Singh s/o Satnam Singh – petitioner No.2, Karabir @ Karan Singh petitioner No.3 and Jarnail Singh petitioner No.5, are ordered to be released on interim bail to the satisfaction of the trial Court.”

¶28

At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed on record the certified copy of order dated 15.04.2014, which would reveal that the bail and surety bonds furnished by petitioner Nos.1 to 3 and 5, in pursuance of order of this Court, were accepted and attested, by the trial Judge.

¶29

Kumar Naresh 2014.05.29 14:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶30

CRM No.M-10227 of 2014 (O&M)

¶31

-3-

¶32

In the light of aforesaid reasons, the instant petition for anticipatory bail is accepted. The interim (provisional) bail already granted to petitioner Nos.1 to 3 and 5, by way of order dated March 25,

¶33

2014, by this Court, is hereby made absolute.

¶34

May 27, 2014 naresh.k

¶35

( M EHINDER S INGH S ULLAR) JUDGE

¶36

Kumar Naresh 2014.05.29 14:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

Satnam Singh and Anr. v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satnam Singh and Anr. 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

Jyotshna Sharma and Anr. Vs State of Punjab

Vijay Pal Vs State of Haryana

Surender Vs State of Haryana

Veerpal Kaur Vs Chhinderpal Kaur &Anr

Subhash Chand Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Manjit Singh & Anr. Vs State of Punjab