High CourtsSingle Bench

Manju vs State of Haryana

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 10 October 2018 · Citation: (2018) 10 P&H CK 0101

HON’BLE JUDGES
Arvind Singh Sangwan, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 307, 323, 452,506
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous (M) No.37671 of 2018
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

17 paragraphs · 318 words

This petition has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 103 dated

24.03.2018, registered under Sections 323, 452, 307, 506 and 34 of the IPC at Police Station Sadar Fatehabad, District Fatehabad.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the FIR was registered on the instance of the petitioner and later on, the police during investigation

arrayed the petitioner herself as an accused on the premise that there was evidence that petitioner and co-accused Sita Ram have caused injuries to

petitioner's husband Subhash Bishnoi.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that during investigation the police has even found co-accused Krishan Kumar to be innocent and,

therefore, it is to be decided during the course of trial as to whether the petitioner had any role in the present incident or not as she was the

complainant in the present FIR.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is a lady and a labourer; has two minor children and she is not involved in any

other case. It is also submitted that challan stands presented and the case is now fixed for prosecution evidence, hence, it will take a long time in

conclusion of the trial.

Learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Mohinder Singh, has not disputed the aforesaid facts and submits that only one prosecution witness

has been examined so far.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

Without commenting upon the merits of the case, considering the facts that petitioner is in custody since 31.03.2018; not involved in any other case

and being a mother of two minor children, she has to take care of her children, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released

on regular bail on her furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.