Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SUSHILA DEVI & ANR versus STATE OF

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Sushila Devi & Anr v. State of - CRM-58508-M-2006 [2006] RD-P&H 10079 (8 November 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Crl.Misc.No.58508-M of 2006

DATE OF DECISION: NOVEMBER 16, 2006

Sushila Devi and another

...PETITIONERS

VERSUS

State of

...RESPONDENT

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL
Present: Mr. Vikram Chaudhri, Advocate,

for the petitioners.

Mr.M.S.Sindhu, DAG, Haryana.

...

The petitioners apprehending their arrest in a non-bailable offence in cross version under Sections 323/406/418/420/120-B/427 IPC recorded in case FIR No.135 dated 26.4.2006 under Sections 148/149/323/452/354/506 IPC, registered at Police Station City Sonepat, have filed this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail.

I have heard the counsel for the parties and gone through the contents of the FIR.

Counsel for the petitioners contends that petitioner No.1 was the complainant in the aforesaid FIR, which was registered against Jaidev Sharma and others. After 40 days of the registration of the FIR, on the statement of Jaidev Sharma, cross version was recorded in which even no role has been attributed to the petitioners except that petitioner No.1 and her minor son (petitioner No.2) were present there.

Counsel for the petitioners further contends that in terms of the interim order dated September 25, 2006, the petitioners have joined the investigation. Counsel for the respondent-State does not dispute this fact and further on instructions from ASI Devinder Kumar states that the petitioners are no more required for further investigation.

In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the interim order dated September 25, 2006 is made absolute on the same terms and conditions.

This bail order shall remain in operation till the investigation culminates into filing of challan under Section 173 Cr.P.C. except for material change in the circumstances. Thereafter, the petitioners shall be entitled to the grant of regular bail by the trial Court and the same shall further continue till conclusion of the trial on the conditions to be imposed by the court of competent jurisdiction.

Disposed of accordingly.

November 16, 2006 (SATISH KUMAR MITTAL)

vkg JUDGE


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.