Wednesday, 20, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Ajay vs State Of Haryana
2021 Latest Caselaw 619 P&H

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 619 P&H
Judgement Date : 16 February, 2021

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ajay vs State Of Haryana on 16 February, 2021
CRM-M-6105 of 2021                                              {1}


            IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                       AT CHANDIGARH

                                          CRM-M-6105 of 2021
                                          Date of decision:16.02.2021

Ajay                                           ... Petitioner

                           Vs.


State of Haryana                               ... Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL

Present:-    Mr. Neeraj Saini, Advocate, for the petitioner.

             Mr. Gurmeet Singh, AAG, Haryana.

SUVIR SEHGAL, J. (Oral)

The Court has been convened through video conferencing due

to Covid-19 pandemic.

This is the second petition for grant of regular bail to the

petitioner in FIR No.321 dated 22.07.20220 (Annexure P-1) registered

under Section 346 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, ( Section 376 IPC was added

later on), at Police Station Kundli, District Sonipat.

The first petition (CRM-M-33713 of 2020) was withdrawn

after arguments on 30.10.2020.

Counsel for the petitioner has attempted to re-argue the bail

petition. He has not been able to show any change in circumstances or fact-

situation which has led to the filing of the present petition within a period of

four months of dismissal of first one.




                                 1 of 2

 CRM-M-6105 of 2021                                        {2}


Without there being any change in the circumstances, the

second petition would be deemed to be seeking review of the earlier

judgment, which is not permissible in criminal law as has been held by the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in Hari Singh Mann Vs. Harbhajan Singh Bajwa

(2001) 1 SCC 169; State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Kajad, 2001 SCC

(Criminal) 1520 and State of Maharashtra Vs. Capt.Buddhikota Subha

Rao 1989 Supl. (2) SCC 605.

It is relevant to mention that a person who is accused of

offences which are an affront to decency and dignity of women, cannot

expect any sympathy from the Court.

Accordingly, this second petition for grant of regular bail to the

petitioner is dismissed.



                                               (SUVIR SEHGAL)
                                                   JUDGE
February 16, 2021
savita

Whether Speaking/Reasoned                            Yes/No
Whether Reportable                                   Yes/No




                               2 of 2

 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter