Crl. Misc. No. M- 32749 of 2011(O&M) Date of Decision: December 13 v. State of Haryana
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 13 Dec 2011
- Bench
- GURDEV SINGH
Outcome
Disposed of
Petition is disposed of accordingly
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 438
- Arms Act, 1959 ss. 3, 25
Judgment
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH *** Present: Ms.Monisha Lamba, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Sidharth Sarup, DAG, Haryana *** Gurdev Singh, J. Heard. This petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by Mufid son of Fajjar, petitioner-accused, for releasing him on bail in the event of his arrest in FIR No. 324 dated
Operative part
25.9.2011 registered under Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959. He was allowed interim anticipatory bail, vide order dated 1.11.2011 subject to one of the condition that he shall join the investigation as and when required by the Investigating Officer. According to the State counsel, he joined the investigation but he is not disclosing the source of pistol, recovered from the possession of the other accused, and as such his custodial interrogation is required. Crl. Misc. No. M- 32749 of 2011(O&M) -2- For proving the offence mentioned in the FIR, the prosecution is not required to prove the sources of weapon and it is only to prove that the pistol was recovered from the possession of the accused and he was not having any licence under Section 3 of the Arms Act, 1959, for keeping that pistol in his possession. Therefore, it cannot be said that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required. In the result, the order dated 1.11.2011 is hereby made absolute subject to the conditions incorporated therein. Petition is disposed of accordingly. (GURDEV SINGH) JUDGE December 13, 2011 PARAMJIT
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Petition is disposed of accordingly
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438; Arms Act, 1959 — ss. 3, 25.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 13 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.