Dismissed
Baldev Singh v. State of Haryana
Punjab & Haryana HCCRM-M/33874/2014
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
of 2014 1 In the High Court for the States…
What the court decided
AI extract
of 2014 1 In the High Court for the States…
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.
���������������������� �
In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
����������������������
����������������������������
Baldev Singh
..Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana
..Respondent
Coram: ������������ !��������"�#���$���"�!"��
Present: Mr.Satbir Rathore, Advocate for the petitioner.
��"�#���$��"�!"��%� �&'���(
Heard.
Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that petitioner is not named in the First Information Report and also in the challan filed by the investigating agency but has been summoned to face trial on the statement of one Nirmal Singh whose name was not there in the list of witnesses appended with the challan. He contends that co* accused of the present petitioner, namely Rajbir Singh has been allowed interim anticipatory bail vide order dated 23.9.2014 passed in
�������������)�����������
However, a perusal of the record shows that petitioner has been summoned on the basis of the statement made by Nirmal Singh to the effect that deceased was last seen in the company of the present petitioner and two others whereafter he was found dead.
NIRMAL KANT 2014.10.06 16:02 I am the author of this document high court chandigarh
�
����������������������
In view of the above situation matter needs to be investigated into more particularly to ascertain the cause of death of deceased. No special circumstances entitling the petitioner to the extraordinary relief of prearrest bail, are coming forth.
As regards grant of interim anticipatory bail to co*accused Rajbir Singh, suffice it to say that in view of the role attributed to said Rajbir Singh and the present petitioner, no parity can be claimed by the petitioner with him.
Dismissed.
October 1, 2014 (MAHAVIR S.CHAUHAN) nk JUDGE
NIRMAL KANT 2014.10.06 16:02 I am the author of this document high court chandigarh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether petitioner is entitled to pre-arrest bail despite not being named in FIR or challan.
Whether petitioner can claim parity with co-accused who received interim anticipatory bail.
Baldev Singh
State of Haryana
MAHAVIR S.CHAUHAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court