Punjab-Haryana High Court
Raja Ram vs State Of Haryana on 9 October, 2012
Author: Ram Chand Gupta
Bench: Ram Chand Gupta
CRM No.M-24227 of 2012 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Crl. Misc. No. M- 24227 of 2012(O&M)
Date of Decision: October 9, 2012.
Raja Ram. ...... PETITIONER(s)
Versus
State of Haryana.
...... RESPONDENT (s)
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA
Present: Mr. Vivek Khatri,
Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Sandeep S.Mann, Sr.DAG, Haryana.
*****
RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral)
The present petition has been filed for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure in FIR no.178 dated 09.04.2011, under Sections 302/34 IPC registered at police station City Fatehabad, District Fatehabad.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record including the impugned order passed by learned Sessions Judge, Fatehabad dismissing bail application filed by the petitioner.
Brief allegations against petitioner-accused are that, he was having some dispute with deceased-Ram Singh over payment of money. Panchayat was convened in regard to said money transaction between CRM No.M-24227 of 2012 2 deceased and petitioner. In the Panchayat, petitioner agreed to give money and thereafter, he had been delaying the matter. However, finally on 08.04.2012 he agreed to return the money. Hence, deceased alongwith complainant and another relative, Satya Narain had gone to the house of petitioner on 08.04.2011 at 9.00 or 9.30 PM, complainant and Satya Narain stood in the street in front of the house of petitioner and however, Ram Singh (deceased) had gone to the house of petitioner to take money as promised. However, complainant Satya Narain heard noise from the house of petitioner and saw that petitioner alongwith his wife and driver, Sanjay @Dassi and one Birender were quarreling with Ram Singh and were giving him abuses as to why he demanded money. When Ram Singh tried to run, present petitioner alongwith co-accused caught hold of him and driver of present petitioner, namely, Sanjay @Dassi had given 2/3 knife blows to Ram Singh, which proved fatal.
It has been contended by learned counsel for petitioner-accused that he was found innocent by the police after investigation whereas challan was filed against co-accused and that he was summoned to face trial on application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. filed by prosecution by learned trial court. It is further contended that pursuant to interim relief granted by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 14.08.2012, he has already appeared before learned trial court and admitted to interim bail.
However, bail application has been vehemently opposed by learned counsel for respondent-State on the plea that petitioner is the main accused as motive for committing murder of Ram Singh has been attributed CRM No.M-24227 of 2012 3 to him. Further contended that he was having dispute with the deceased and the murder of Ram Singh was committed in the house of petitioner. It is further submitted that he actually participated in the occurrence and he had caught hold Ram Singh whereas his driver gave fatal blow. It is further submitted that similarly placed co-accused i.e. his wife and another person have been challaned by the police. It is further contended that petitioner is likely to pressurise the prosecution witnesses if he is ordered to be released on bail as he is the main accused.
There are serious allegations against petitioner-accused as discussed above. Hence, merely on the ground that he was not challaned by the police and was summoned to face trial by learned trial court under Section 319 Cr.P.C., it cannot be said that he is entitled for extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail. Similarly placed co-accused were already arrested and one of the accused i.e. wife of petitioner is on regular bail.
Hence, in view of these facts, I am of the view that there is no merit in the instant application for anticipatory bail filed by petitioner- accused.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant application for anticipatory bail filed by Raja Ram is, hereby, dismissed being devoid of merit.
Interim order dated 14.08.2012 already granted in his favour stands vacated.
( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) October 9, 2012. JUDGE 'om'