Santosh Vs State of Haryana

The petitioner is seeking regular bail in FIR No. 387 dated 02.10.2014 registered at Police Station Panipat Sadar, District Panipat under Sections 498A/452/ 328/ 304-B/302 read with Section 34 IPC.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is the mother-in-law who is in custody since 31.10.2014 and main witnesses namely the brother, father and husband of the deceased have been examined and all of them have not supported the prosecution version. He refers to the statements which have been placed on record.

¶16

Learned State counsel submits that all the private witnesses have been examined.

¶17

The main witnesses of the prosecution have not supported the prosecution case . The petitioner is in custody since October 2014.

¶18

Without commenting anything on the merits of the case and considering the fact that the trial will take time to conclude, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on her furnishing

¶19

GURPREET SINGH 2016.05.27 10:43 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶20

-2-

¶21

Crl. Misc. No. M-12671 of 2016

¶22

local surety and adequate bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate.

¶23

(ANITA CHAUDHRY) JUDGE

¶24

May 26, 2016 Gurpreet

¶25

GURPREET SINGH 2016.05.27 10:43 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh

Santosh v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hardeep Alias Hunny Vs State of Haryana

Sukhwinder Singh @ Pamma and Anr. Vs State of Punjab

Ranjit Malu Vs State of Haryana

Sunil Kumar & Ors. Vs State of Haryana & Anr.

Mohammad Kadir Vs State of Haryana

Amrit Chhabra Vs State of Punjab