Horam And Others vs State Of Haryana on 21 February, 2012

[Cites 7, Cited by 1]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Horam And Others vs State Of Haryana on 21 February, 2012

Bench: Ram Chand Gupta

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                      CHANDIGARH




                                     Crl. Misc. No. M- 944 OF 2012(O&M)
                                      Date of Decision: February 21, 2012.


Horam and others.
                                                ...... PETITIONER(s)

                                   Versus

State of Haryana.
                                                ...... RESPONDENT (s)



CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA


Present:    Mr. Rakesh Dhiman,
            Advocate, for the petitioners.

            Mr. S.S.Pattar, 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.149 dated 27.10.2011, under Sections 147/148/323/325/452 IPC, registered at police station Bhondsi, district Gurgaon.

CRM No.M-944 of 2012 2

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record including the impugned order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurgaon dismissing anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of the petitioners.

This Court while issuing notice of motion on 23.01.2012 passed the following order:-

"Crl.M.No.4800 of 2012

Requests for placing on record Annexures P5 and P6. The same are taken on record subject to all just exceptions.

Application stands disposed of accordingly.

Crl.M.No.1972 of 2012

Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Crl.M.No.M-944 of 2012 Contends that no specific injury has been attributed to any of the petitioners and that specific injury has been attributed to co-accused only. Further contends that FIR was lodged by Mahipal, from the side of petitioners and the present petitioners were lodged in cross-case registered at the instance of accused party in the FIR.

Notice of motion to Advocate General, Haryana, for 21.2.2012.

However, in the meantime, petitioners are directed to join the investigation and in case they are arrested, they shall be released on interim bail by the Arresting Officer to his satisfaction subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C."

CRM No.M-944 of 2012 3

It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitiones that they have already joined the investigation pursuant to said order dated 23.01.2012 This fact has not been disputed by learned counsel for respondent-State on the plea that Investigating Officer of the case has not come present.

There are no allegations on behalf of the State that petitioners are likely to abscond or that they are likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts in the Court, if released on bail.

Hence, in view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of Horam, Baljeet and Ishwar is accepted and order dated 23.01.2012 granting interim bail in favour of the petitioners is, hereby, made absolute subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

The present petition stands disposed of accordingly.

( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) February 21, 2012. JUDGE 'om'

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Punjab-Haryana High Court