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

Karan @ Toffee vs State Of Punjab on 18 May, 2020

Author: Sudhir Mittal

Bench: Sudhir Mittal

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                        AT CHANDIGARH

Sr. No.112                   CRM-M-12463-2020
                             DATE OF DECISION: May 18, 2020


KARAN @ TOFFEE
                                                            ..PETITIONER

                                     VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB

                                                           ...RESPONDENT


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR MITTAL


Present:     Mr. Anil Kumar Spehia, Advocate,
             for the petitioner.

             Mr. H.S. Sullar, DAG, Punjab.

             *****

SUDHIR MITTAL, J. (ORAL)

The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 36 dated 04.03.2020 registered at Police Station Division No.5, District Jalandhar, under Sections 452, 506, 427, 148 & 149 IPC.

2. According to the allegations in the FIR, the petitioner along with his co-accused trespassed into the house of the complainant and damaged property.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely involved in this case. Actually, the mother of the petitioner was injured by the complainant side and a complaint regarding the same was made but the police failed to register an FIR. This shows that the police is siding with the complainant party.




                                                                            13

                                1 of 2
             ::: Downloaded on - 18-05-2020 21:09:43 :::
 CRM-M-12463-2020                                                 --2--

4. Learned State counsel submits that a scuffle took place between the parties on 02.03.2020 and since no FIR was registered regarding the said incident, the petitioner trespassed into the house of the complainant and extensively damaged property along with his henchman. Thus, he does not deserve the benefit of anticipatory bail.

5. If the police has failed to register an FIR on a complaint made by the petitioner, it does not entitle him to take the law in his own hands and trespass into private property and damage the same. Thus, I find no ground to exercise my discretion in favour of the petitioner.

6. The petition is accordingly dismissed.

May 18, 2020                                              (SUDHIR MITTAL)
Ankur                                                         JUDGE

Whether speaking/reasoned               Yes

Whether Reportable                      No




                                                                             14

                               2 of 2
            ::: Downloaded on - 18-05-2020 21:09:44 :::