Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 4]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Hemant Sachdeva vs Union Territory Of Chandigarh on 19 January, 2012

                   Crl. Misc. No.M-33518 of 2011
                                   1


           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                       AT CHANDIGARH

                                Crl. Misc. No.M-33518 of 2011
                                 Date of decision : 19.01.2012


Hemant Sachdeva                                               ......Petitioner

                                  versus
Union Territory of Chandigarh                                 ...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJENDER SINGH MALIK

            1.   Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be
                 allowed to see the judgment?
            2.   To be referred to the Reporters or not?
            3.   Whether the judgment should be reported in the
                 Digest?


Present:    Mr. Abinashi Singh, Advocate
            for the petitioner.

            Mr. Vikas Malik, AAG, Haryana
            for the State.

            Mr. A.D.S. Sukhija, Advocate for
            the complainant.

                        --

VIJENDER SINGH MALIK , J. (Oral)

Hemant Sachdeva petitioner has applied for regular bail under the provisions of section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in a case registered by way of FIR No. 90 dated 05.04.2010 at Police Station Sector 11, Chandigarh for an offence punishable under section 307 IPC and sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act.

The case against the petitioner is that injured Sanjay having outraged the modesty of sister-in-law of the petitioner, he fired from some Crl. Misc. No.M-33518 of 2011 2 concealed weapon upon Sanjay and caused him injury. It is admitted before me by learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the complainant that Sanjay was the only eye witness of the occurrence in this case and he has died in a road side accident before being examined in the case. The petitioner is in custody for the last about four months.

Keeping in view the aforesaid fact, the petitioner deserves to the relief of bail. Consequently, the petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.20,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial court.

Jan.19, 2012                                 (VIJENDER SINGH MALIK)
dinesh                                            JUDGE