This was an oral order dismissing a petition for anticipatory bail. The Court held that allegations against the petitioner were specific and she was found involved in the occurrence by the investigating agency, despite declarations of innocence for other accused.
Anticipatory bail petition dismissed.
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.
[ 1 ]
CRM-M-16465-2021
102
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-16465-2021 Date of Decision: 20.04.2021
Memuna ..........................................Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana.................................. Respondent
CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL
(through video conferencing)
Present: Mr. Pawan Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner.
MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (Oral)
This petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.330 dated 23.10.2020 under Sections 148, 149, 323, 324, 506, 307 IPC registered at Police Station Hathin, District Palwal.
Learned counsel submits that no specific injury has been attributed to the petitioner in the occurrence in question. He further submits that the other persons, who were named in the FIR were declared innocent by the investigating agency which casts a serious doubt on the authenticity of the allegations levelled against the petitioner in the FIR in question.
Heard.
A perusal of the FIR reveals that there are specific allegations levelled against the petitioner of having caught hold of the injured-Ajmat SANDAL SHARMA 2021.04.20 17:40 when the co-accused was inflicting injuries with a knife. The factum of the I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CRM-M-16465-2021 [ 2 ]
co-accused having been declared innocent by the investigating agency would be inconsequential, as the fact remains that the petitioner was found involved in the occurrence in question by the investigating agency.
In view of the above, the petition is dismissed.
( MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) 20.04.2021 JUDGE rupi Note: Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable: Yes / No
SANDAL SHARMA 2021.04.20 17:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner charged under Sections 148, 149, 323, 324, 506, 307 IPC?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Memuna
State of Haryana
Manjari Nehru Kaul
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
