The High Court granted regular bail to the petitioner accused under Sections 376-D IPC, Section 506 IPC, and POCSO Act. Bail was subject to a condition not to contact the victim's family.
Petition allowed; petitioner released on bail with condition not to contact victim's family.
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 of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
Crl. Misc. No. M-31768 of 2018 Date of Decision: 29.10.2018
Gulab @ Suraj
......Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana
.....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANITA CHAUDHRY
Present: Mr. Surender Jain, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Arun Kumar, AAG, Haryana.
ANITA CHAUDHRY, J (ORAL)
The petitioner is seeking regular bail in FIR No. 384 dated 29.7.2017 registered at Police Station Kharkhoda, Sonepat under Sections 376-D, 506 IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act.
The DNA report has still not been received. The petitioner is in custody since 27.7.2016. The complainant and prosecutrix had been examined. The trial is taking time.
Without commenting anything on the merits of the case, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate with the condition that he will not contact the family of the victim.
(ANITA CHAUDHRY) JUDGE
October 29, 2018 Gurpreet Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes Whether reportable : No
GURPREET SINGH 2018.10.29 16:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail pending trial in FIR No. 384.
Gulab @ Suraj
State of Haryana
Anita Chaudhry
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
