Allowed

Mubeen v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC7 Mar 2017CRM-M/435/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 287 involving animal cruelty offences, directing him to cooperate with investigation and appear for regular bail on challan presentation.

What did the court decide?

Grant of anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner shall make himself available for police interrogation, shall not tamper with witnesses, shall not leave India without permission, and sh

Mubeen Vs State of Haryana — Anticipatory Bail | Punjab & Haryana HC (2017)

¶1

-1-

¶2

CRM-M-435 of 2017

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM-M-435 of 2017 Date of Decision: 07.03.2017

Mubeen

....Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Haryana ....Respondent

¶9

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA

¶10

Present: Mr. Saleem Ahmed, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶11

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

¶12

¶13

SURINDER GUPTA, J.(Oral)

¶14

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. 287 dated 06.12.2016 registered for offences punishable under Sections 13 (2) and 17 of the Haryana Gauvansh Sanrakshan and Gausamvardhan Act, 2015; 11 of Animal Cruelty Act; and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, at Police Station Ferozepur Jhirka, District Mewat.

¶15

Heard.

¶16

Learned State counsel on instructions from ASI Raj Kumar submits that the petitioner has joined the investigation and his custodial interrogation is not required.

¶17

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 12.01.2017 is made absolute till the presentation of challan, subject to the following terms:-

¶18

(i) that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by the police as and when required;

¶19

Jitender Kumar 2017.03.07 17:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CHANDIGARH

¶20

CRM-M-435 of 2017

¶21

-2-

¶22

(ii) that the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make 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;

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶26

Jitender Kumar 2017.03.07 17:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CHANDIGARH

Mubeen v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mubeen 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

Sahid Vs State of Haryana

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

Sangeeta and Another Vs State of Haryana and Others