Punjab-Haryana High Court
Anuj vs State Of Haryana And Another on 20 March, 2024
Author: Gurvinder Singh Gill
Bench: Gurvinder Singh Gill
2024:PHHC:040423
In The High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana
At Chandigarh
CRA-S-425-2024 (O&M)
Date of Decision:- 20.03.2024
Anuj ... Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana and another ... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL
Present:- Mr. Naresh Kumar Ganga, Advocate, for the appellant.
Mr. Ramender Singh Chauhan, AAG, Haryana.
*****
GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J. (Oral)
1. The instant appeal is directed against order dated 24.01.2024 passed
by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirsa, vide which application
filed by the appellant seeking grant of anticipatory bail has been
declined in a case arising out of FIR No.621, dated 15.9.2023, Police
Station City Sirsa, District Sirsa, under Sections 147, 149, 427, 506
IPC and Section 3 of SC/ST Act.
2. The FIR in question was lodged at the instance of Jagdish Kumar
wherein it is alleged that on 15.9.2023 when he along with his son
was proceeding from his village to Sirsa then 10-12 persons on
motorcycles, who were armed with sharp edged weapons started
following them. It is alleged that the said persons hurled abuses and
addressed them as dhanak and thereatened to cut them into pieces and
to kill them. However, the complainant and his son managed to save
integrity of this order/judgment
CRA-S-425-2024 (O&M) -2- 2024:PHHC:040423
themseves by entering into a house which was open in Kalyan Nagar,
Street No.1.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he has falsely been
implicated in the present case and that the falsity of the FIR would be
evident from the fact that although a dozen assailants are said to be
armed with weapons, but not even a single injury was caused on the
person of the complainant or his son. It has been submitted that it is
very convenient to raise allegations as have been in the present case
and that the same are not substantiated in any manner. Learned
counsel for the appellant submits that two FIRs have been lodged
against the accused party at the instance of the complainant party in
order to pressurize them as the accused party has also lodged one FIR
against them.
4. Opposing the petition, learned State counsel submits that since
objectionable words have been used by the appellant, no case for
grant of anticipatory bail is made out. Notice had also been issued to
respondent No.2 who has chosen not to come forward to contest the
appeal despite having been served.
5. This Court has considered the rival submissions.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having regard to
the facts and circumstances of the case and the allegations and also
the fact that no injury was caused to the complainant or his son
though a dozen accused are said to have been armed, this Court
deems it appropriate that a direction be issued to the appellant to
surrender before the trial Court concerned and move an application
integrity of this order/judgment
CRA-S-425-2024 (O&M) -3- 2024:PHHC:040423
for grant of regular bail which shall be considered expeditiously.
Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of with a direction to the
appellant to surrender before the trial Court within a period of 10 days
from today and to move an application for grant of regular bail. In
case, any such application is filed in the forenoon of the day, the trial
Court shall consider to dispose of the same expeditiously, preferably
on the same day itself having regard to the fact that it is prima-facie
not a case where any custodial interrogation would be warranted.
20.03.2024 (GURVINDER SINGH GILL)
mohan JUDGE
Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No
Whether Reportable Yes / No
integrity of this order/judgment
