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 5, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Sajan Singh @ Chajju vs State Of Punjab on 12 March, 2018

Author: Sudhir Mittal

Bench: Sudhir Mittal

CRM-M-10183-2018                                                     -1-

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                           AT CHANDIGARH

101                                       CRM-M-10183-2018
                                          Date of Decision: March 12, 2018

Sajan alias Chajju
                                                      ......Petitioner

                                 versus


State of Punjab
                                                      .....Respondent


CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUDHIR MITTAL

                                             ***

Present:     Mr. Jitender Singh Dadwal, Advocate
             for the petitioner.

                                      ***


Sudhir Mittal, J. (Oral)

The petitioner seeks grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.461, dated 19.09.2017, under sections 307, 341, 324, 148, 149 IPC, registered at Police Station Civil Lines, District Amritsar.

2. As per the allegations in the FIR, a large crowd attacked the injured- complainant with sharp as well as blunt weapons and inflicted as many as five injuries upon him. The complainant is a young boy studying in Class XII and was attacked while he was bringing his dog back from the veterinary Doctor after getting him inoculated.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is alleged to have been armed with a baseball bat but no injury is attributed to him. This is also borne out from the fact that all the injuries upon the complainant have been inflicted with sharp edged weapon. It is his contention that the petitioner has 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 17-03-2018 23:56:58 ::: CRM-M-10183-2018 -2- been named on account of petty village rivalry.

4. I am afraid, I cannot accept the contention of the learned counsel at this stage because the petitioner is alleged to have been part of an unlawful assembly, which had caused injury dangerous to life of the complainant and prima facie offence under Section 307 IPC is attracted. Such like incidents are to be dealt with an iron hand.

5. In view of the above, there is no merit in this petition and the same is dismissed.

March 12, 2018                                      [SUDHIR MITTAL]
sonia arora                                             JUDGE


                           Whether speaking/reasoned :             Yes
                           Whether Reportable :                    No




                                        2 of 2
                     ::: Downloaded on - 17-03-2018 23:56:59 :::