High CourtsSingle Bench

Monu vs State Of Haryana

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 14 December 2020 · Citation: (2020) 12 P&H CK 0250

HON’BLE JUDGES
Arvind Singh Sangwan, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 147, 149, 323, 341, 379, 506 · Scheduled Castes And Scheduled Tribes (Prevention Of Atrocities), Act, 1989 — Section 3(2)(v)
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Petition (M) No. 41084 Of 2020
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

16 paragraphs · 311 words

Arvind Singh Sangwan, J

Prayer in this petition is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short 'Cr.P.C.') in FIR

No.220 dated 09.10.2020, for offence punishable under Sections 147, 149, 323, 341, 379 & 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short ‘IPC’)

and Section 3 (2) (v) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities), Act, 1989, registered at Police Station Garhi, District Jind.

Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is first offender, not involved in any other and one of the co-accused, namely Pushpinder,

has been granted the benefit of anticipatory bail. Counsel further submitted that investigation is complete and the petitioner is in custodial since

14.10.2020 and the allegation against him are that he along with the co-accused has caused injuries to the complainant and has snatched the

motorcycle, which has already been recovered. Counsel further submitted that the petitioner is young man of 19 years and is nominated on the

disclosure statement of co-accused Sonu @ Fauji.

Learned State counsel has not disputed the factual position, on instructions from ASI Ravinder Singh.

After hearing the counsel for the parties, without commenting anything on merits of the case and considering the fact that the co-accused of the

petitioner has been granted the concession of anticipatory bail and he is in custody since 14.10.2020, I find it to be a fit case for grant of regular bail.

Thus, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial

Court/Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate.

However, it will be open for the prosecution to apply for cancellation of bail of the petitioner, in case he is found involved in any other case or misusing

the concession of bail, in any manner.