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 0, Cited by 1]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Sanjiv Kaushal vs State Of Haryana on 26 February, 2016

Author: M.M.S. Bedi

Bench: M.M.S. Bedi

                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                                      AT CHANDIGARH

           (208)                                   CRM-M-1254-2016
                                                   Decided on: February 26, 2016.


           Sanjiv Kaushal
                                                                                  .... Petitioner
                                              Versus

           State of Haryana
                                                                               ..... Respondent

           CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI

           Present:            Mr. R.S. Rai, Sr. Advocate, with
                               Mr. Anurag Arora, Advocate, for the petitioner.

                               Mr. Gurdas Singh Salwara, DAG, Haryana.

           M.M.S. BEDI, J (ORAL)

The portable ultrasound machine of the petitioner is alleged to have been used by the other persons while he was in Calcutta without any entries in the PNDT register.

Recoveries have already been effected. The petitioner has already joined investigation. The culpability of the petitioner in the transaction of raid dated 04.11.2015 will certainly be a debatable issue as he was admittedly not present when the alleged feotus test had been conducted.

Petitioner having joined investigation, he can be granted concession of bail.

Petition is allowed. It is ordered that in case of arrest of petitioner, he will be released on bail to the satisfaction of the arresting officer subject to the following conditions:

(1) Petitioner will join investigation as and when required;
HARSHA RANI 2016.02.26 18:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-1254-2016 -2-
(2) Petitioner will not tamper with the evidence or hamper the investigation in any manner; and (3) Petitioner will not indulge in similar activity of which he is accused of, during the entire period of trial.

(M.M.S. BEDI) JUDGE February 26, 2016 harsha HARSHA RANI 2016.02.26 18:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document