High CourtsSINGLE BENCH

Surender vs State of Haryana

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 13 January 2017 · Citation: (2017) 01 P&H CK 0240

HON’BLE JUDGES
Surinder Gupta
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
<a href=3863>Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973</a>, <a href=3863-439>Section 439</a> - Special powers of High Court or Court of Session regarding bail · <a href=1767>Indian Penal Code, 1860</a>, <a href=1767-120B>Section 120B</a>, <a href=1767-147
CASE NUMBER
185 of 2017
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

48 paragraphs · 477 words
1.

The present petition has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 301 dated

28.08.2016 registered for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149,

307, 506 read with Section 120-B IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act, at

Police Station Dadri City, District Bhiwani.

2.

Heard.

3.

Notice of motion.

4.

On asking of the court, Ms. Harpreet Kaur, AAG, Haryana,

who is present in the Court accepts notice and submits that intimation by

Registry informing of fixation of the petition has already been received and

record of the case is available with her.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner

was having property dispute with the complainant and a civil suit is pending

in this regard. Complainant has implicated the petitioner in this FIR with

the allegation that on 27.08.2016, he accompanied by six/seven persons hit

motorcycle of the petitioner and his co-accused inflicted injuries on the

person of complainant. As per complainant, the petitioner was having a

katta in his hand but no firearm injury was caused. Police has completed the

investigation and challan has been presented against the petitioner in which

charge has not been framed so far.

6.

Learned State counsel submits that petitioner is the main

accused at whose instance the entire occurrence had taken place, as such,

grant of bail to the petitioner will effect the case of prosecution as he may

prevail upon the prosecution witnesses.

7.

In the FIR, complainant has not alleged any reason for the

petitioner and his co-accused for causing injuries to him. However, perusal

of order dated 19.12.2016 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Bhiwani,

declining bail to the petitioner shows that another FIR bearing no. 151 has

already been registered against the petitioner on the complaint of

complainant/injured. This shows element of enmity of complainant with

petitioner.

8.

Keeping in view the fact that no injury was attributed to the

petitioner and on giving a careful thought to submissions of learned counsel

for the petitioner and learned State counsel but without expressing any

opinion on merits of the case, the present petition is allowed. Petitioner-

Surender is ordered to be released on regular bail on furnishing bail bond

and surety bond to the satisfaction of concerned Chief Judicial

Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, subject to following terms:-

a. The petitioner shall comply with the conditions

mentioned in Section 437(3) Cr.P.C.

b. In the event of his absence on any date of hearing, the

benefit of bail allowed to the petitioner shall stand

withdrawn. The trial Court shall be competent to cancel

his bail bond and surety bond and proceed to procure his

presence in accordance with law. In that eventuality the

petitioner shall have to apply for bail afresh.

c. He shall not leave the country without the previous

permission of the Court.