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 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Ajay vs State Of Haryana on 16 February, 2021

Author: Suvir Sehgal

Bench: Suvir Sehgal

CRM-M-6105 of 2021                                              {1}


            IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                       AT CHANDIGARH

                                          CRM-M-6105 of 2021
                                          Date of decision:16.02.2021

Ajay                                           ... Petitioner

                           Vs.


State of Haryana                               ... Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL

Present:-    Mr. Neeraj Saini, Advocate, for the petitioner.

             Mr. Gurmeet Singh, AAG, Haryana.

SUVIR SEHGAL, J. (Oral)

The Court has been convened through video conferencing due to Covid-19 pandemic.

This is the second petition for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No.321 dated 22.07.20220 (Annexure P-1) registered under Section 346 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, ( Section 376 IPC was added later on), at Police Station Kundli, District Sonipat.

The first petition (CRM-M-33713 of 2020) was withdrawn after arguments on 30.10.2020.

Counsel for the petitioner has attempted to re-argue the bail petition. He has not been able to show any change in circumstances or fact- situation which has led to the filing of the present petition within a period of four months of dismissal of first one.





                                 1 of 2
             ::: Downloaded on - 23-08-2021 08:03:45 :::
 CRM-M-6105 of 2021                                        {2}


Without there being any change in the circumstances, the second petition would be deemed to be seeking review of the earlier judgment, which is not permissible in criminal law as has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Hari Singh Mann Vs. Harbhajan Singh Bajwa (2001) 1 SCC 169; State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Kajad, 2001 SCC (Criminal) 1520 and State of Maharashtra Vs. Capt.Buddhikota Subha Rao 1989 Supl. (2) SCC 605.

It is relevant to mention that a person who is accused of offences which are an affront to decency and dignity of women, cannot expect any sympathy from the Court.

Accordingly, this second petition for grant of regular bail to the petitioner is dismissed.




                                               (SUVIR SEHGAL)
                                                   JUDGE
February 16, 2021
savita

Whether Speaking/Reasoned                            Yes/No
Whether Reportable                                   Yes/No




                               2 of 2
            ::: Downloaded on - 23-08-2021 08:03:46 :::