Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

RAJINDER SINGH & ANR versus STATE OF HARYANA

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Rajinder Singh & Anr v. State of Haryana - CRM-47334-M-2006 [2006] RD-P&H 8069 (29 September 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Crl.Misc.No.47334-M of 2006

DATE OF DECISION: OCTOBER 10, 2006

Rajinder Singh and another

...PETITIONERS

VERSUS

State of Haryana

....RESPONDENT

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL
Present: Mr. J.S.Yadav, Advocate,

for the petitioners.

Mr.Partap Singh, Sr.DAG, Haryana.

...

The petitioners apprehending their arrest in a non-bailable offence in case FIR No.180 dated 21.11.2005 registered under Sections 306/34 IPC at Police Station Sadar Narnaul, District Mohindergarh, have filed this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail.

This order be read in continuation of the earlier order dated August 17, 2006 passed by this Court.

Counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case as they are neither the relatives of deceased Suman nor brother and sister-in-law of her husband. During the investigation, the petitioners were found innocent by the police.

Subsequently, during the trial, the petitioners have been summoned on the statement of one Kashmira. Counsel contends that the statement of Kashmira was duly considered by the police and during investigation, the stand taken in his statement was not found to be correct.

Counsel for the petitioners contends that in terms of the aforesaid interim order, the petitioners had appeared before the trial Court and furnished their regular bail bonds which have been accepted and attested and since then they are regularly appearing. These fact have not been disputed by the State counsel.

In view of the above and for the reasons stated in the interim order dated August 17, 2006, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the same is made absolute.

Disposed of accordingly.

October 10, 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.