Dismissed
Ajay Yadav v. State of Haryana & Ors.
Punjab & Haryana HCCRM-M/44208/2016
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH…
What the court decided
AI extract
COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH…
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
Criminal Misc. No. M-44208 of 2016 Date of decision: 13.08.2018
Ajay Yadav
..Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others
..Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY
Present: Mr. Neeraj Jain, Advocate for Mr. Jagmohan S. Ghumman, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Chetan Sharma, AAG, Haryana for respondent No.1 -State.
Mr. Manish Soni, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 4.
Daya Chaudhary, J. (Oral)
While issuing notice of motion on 02.05.2017, notice qua respondent No.1-State of Haryana only was issued.
Respondents No.2 to 4 were granted regular bail vide order dated 28.10.2016 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Gurgaon.
The present petition has been filed for cancellation of regular bail granted to respondents No.2 to 4 only on the ground that by giving call from different mobiles, threat is being given to the petitioner to withdraw the case and to compromise the dispute.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is being threatened by respondents No.3 and 4 by giving mobile calls and a pressure is being put upon him to compromise the dispute. A written
NEETU RANI 2018.08.16 11:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
Criminal Misc. No. M-44208 of 2016 2
complaint has already been made to Senior Superintendent of Police, Gurgaon.
Learned State counsel on instructions from ASI Shiv Kumar submits that the examination in chief of the petitioner has already been recorded and the complaint has been made by the petitioner at Gurgaon whereas he is resident of Rewari and no complaint has been made there.
On perusal of complaint made by the petitioner to Senior Superintendent of Police, Gurgaon, it appears that no such allegation has been levelled.
However, in case, the petitioner moves any application to local Police of Rewari as well as Gurgaon within a period of one week from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, the necessary action be taken in accordance with law and in case, any threat is there, the protection be given to the petitioner at the time of attending the Court proceedings.
No ground is made out to cancel the regular bail granted to respondents No.2 to 4.
The petition is disposed of with the abovesaid observations.
13.08.2018 (DAYA CHAUDHARY) neetu JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether Reportable No
NEETU RANI 2018.08.16 11:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether grounds for cancellation of regular bail granted to respondents exist.
Whether petitioner needs protection against alleged threats.
Ajay Yadav
State of Haryana
Respondents No. 2 to 4
Daya Chaudhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court