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 3, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Mausam vs State Of Haryana on 14 September, 2018

Author: Ramendra Jain

Bench: Ramendra Jain

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                          AT CHANDIGARH

                                                     CRM-M-40432-2018
                                                     Date of Decision: 14.09.2018

Mausam                                                                .... Petitioner

                                         Versus
State of Haryana                                                      .... Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN

Present: -    Mr. Pankaj Kaushik, Advocate,
              for the petitioner.

RAMENDRA JAIN, J. (ORAL)

Prayer in the instant petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been made for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.420, dated 17.07.2018, registered under Sections 5/13 (2), 17 of Haryana Gauvansh Sarankashan and Gau Samvardhan Act 2015 and 11-59-60 of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 and 120-B IPC, at Police Station Nuh, District Nuh.

According to the prosecution, on 17.07.2018, on secret information, the police party headed by ASI Balbir, signaled to stop the vehicle of the petitioner bearing registration No.HR-27G-6705. However, taking advantage of darkness, the petitioner succeeded in fleeing away. On search of the vehicle, 6 injured cows having tied their mouth and legs with ropes were found loaded along with plastic bag containing two knives and 5 meter rope from its cabin.

Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the petitioner has falsely been implicated. He was not apprehended at the spot. No recovery has to be effected from him. Therefore, his custodial interrogation is not required.

Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner for the reason that offending vehicle was got released by the petitioner on superdari in a similar nature of case registered vide FIR No.6, dated 11.01.2017, which has been again used for transporting cows for slaughtering purposes. Learned Sessions Judge, Mewat, while rejecting anticipatory bail application of the petitioner vide impugned order dated 24.07.2018 has observed that the petitioner is a habitual offender.

In view of above, the petition is dismissed.


14.09.2018                                                  (RAMENDRA JAIN)
monika                                                          JUDGE
             Whether speaking/reasoned                 Yes/No
             Whether Reportable                        Yes/No
                                         1 of 1
                     ::: Downloaded on - 07-10-2018 02:52:22 :::