Allowed

Sahid v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC7 Mar 2017CRM-M/2182/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-judge oral order allowing anticipatory bail petition filed under Section 438 CrPC regarding charges under Haryana Gauvansh Sanrakshan Act, 2015. Bail granted subject to conditions including regular bail on challan presentation.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted till presentation of challan subject to conditions of availability for interrogation, no inducement, no flight, and seeking regular bail on challan.

Sahid Vs State of Haryana — Bail and Remand | Punjab & Haryana HC (2017)

¶1

CRM-M-2182 of 2017

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM-M-2182 of 2017 Date of Decision: 07.03.2017

¶5

Sahid ....Petitioner

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

State of Haryana ....Respondent

¶8

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA

¶9

Present: Mr. Arjun Atri, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶10

Mr. Vikramjit Singh, Addl. A.G., Haryana.

¶11

¶12

SURINDER GUPTA, J.(Oral)

¶13

The present petition has been filed under Section 438 Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 2 dated 02.01.2017 registered for offence punishable under Section 5/13 (2) of the Haryana Gauvansh Sanrakshan and Gausamvardhan Act, 2015, at Police Station Pinangwa, District Mewat.

¶14

Heard.

¶15

Learned State counsel submits that the petitioner has joined the investigation and his custodial interrogation is not required.

¶16

In view of submission of learned State counsel but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this petition is allowed and the order dated 24.01.2017 is made absolute till the presentation of challan, subject to the following terms:-

¶17

(i) that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by the police as and when required; (ii) that the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make

¶18

Jitender Kumar 2017.03.08 10:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CHANDIGARH

¶19

CRM-M-2182 of 2017

¶20

-2-

¶21

any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the accusation against him so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶22

(iii) that the petitioner shall not leave India without the prior permission of the Court.

¶23

(iv) that the petitioner will seek regular bail on the presentation of challan in Court.

¶24

March 07, 2017 ( SURINDER GUPTA ) jk JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No

¶25

Jitender Kumar 2017.03.08 10:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CHANDIGARH

Sahid v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sahid 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

Roop Lal and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Sona Devi & Anr. Vs State of Haryana and Others

Narinder Kaur Vs State of Punjab

Raja Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Sangeeta and Another Vs State of Haryana and Others

Mubeen Vs State of Haryana