Gurpreet Singh @ Chana v. State of Haryana
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
The petition is disposed of accordingly
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 439
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 34, 186, 332, 333, 353
Judgment
Operative part
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH Present: Mr. GP Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Sidharath Sarup, DAG, Haryana. GURDEV SINGH, J. Heard. The petitioner—Gurpreet Singh @ Chana, has filed this petition under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code for grant of regular bail in FIR No. 377 dated 26.5.2011 registered under Sections 332, 333, 353 and 186/34 IPC in Police Station City Sirsa. As per the version given in the FIR, the police party headed by Pardeep Kumar, Head Constable, was assaulted by a number of boys and one of them gave a blow with an iron rod on the right hand of Vishal, Constable. It was only during the investigation that the names of these assailants, including the present petitioner, were ascertained. The Investigating Officer recorded the statement of Jit Singh, Panch. All the accused came to him and made extra-judicial confession that they were involved in the present occurrence. It was just a joint extra-judicial confession and it will be seen during the trial whether the same can be used Crl. Misc. No. M-22316 of 2011 2 against the accused or not? The petitioner and the other accused were named by Vishal, injured, in the supplementary statement. It has not been disputed that the only injury caused to the injured has not been attributed to the present petitioner/accused, who is coming in custody since 23.6.2011. According to the learned State counsel challan has already been presented. However, no progress has been made in the trial. Keeping in view the accusation against the petitioner and his period of detention, he is ordered to be released on bail to the satisfaction of the trial court, subject to the following conditions:- (i) He shall not offer any threat, promise or inducement to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing the same to the Investigating Officer/Court; and (ii) He shall not leave the limits of this country without prior permission of the Court. The petition is disposed of accordingly. December 7, 2011 (GURDEV SINGH ) JUDGE
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The petition is disposed of accordingly
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 439; Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 34, 186, 332, 333, 353.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 07 Dec 2011. The bench was GURDEV SINGH.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.