Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Raj Mohan Singh, J.
Vikas @ Vikku - Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana - Respondent
CRM-M No. 19944 of 2021 & CRM-M No. 20675 of 2021
Decided On : 26-08-2021
Regular Bail - Criminal Law - Indian Penal Code, Sections 195-A, 307, 34, 216, 120-B, 201, 285, 393, 506, 392, 394, Arms Act, Section 25 - The court discussed the offenses under various sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Arms Act, including the allegations of loot, firing, threats, and beatings, and the recovery of weapons and vehicles. The court highlighted the habitual criminal behavior of the petitioner and the lack of justification for granting bail in both cases.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought regular bail in two cases involving allegations of loot, firing, threats, and beatings, resulting in deaths and injuries. The court considered the prosecution's version and the recoveries made from the petitioner, highlighting his habitual criminal behavior.
Finding of the Court:
The court found no justification to grant bail to the petitioner in both cases, considering the prima facie evidence and the petitioner's habitual involvement in criminal activities.
Issues: The issues involved allegations of loot, firing, threats, and beatings, as well as the recovery of weapons and vehicles, leading to deaths and injuries.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the petitioner's habitual criminal behavior, the prima facie evidence, and the lack of justification for granting bail.
Final Decision: The petitions for bail were dismissed, with the court making it clear that the observations were based on prima facie consideration of facts without making any final opinion on the merits of the case.
JUDGMENT
Raj Mohan Singh, J. - Vide this common order, CRM-M Nos.19944 and 20675 of 2021 are being decided.
2. Replies filed by Sandeep Kumar, HPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Madlauda, District Panipat and Om Parkash, HPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Madlauda, District Karnal are taken on record.
3. Petitioner seeks grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No.246 dated 20.08.2020, registered under Sections 195-A, 307, 34, 216, 120-B, 201 IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act at P.S. Israna, District Panipat. Petitioner also seeks grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No.389 dated 15.08.2020 registered under Sections 285, 34, 393 (deleted), 506 IPC, Sections 392, 394 IPC (added later on) and Section 25 of the Arms Act at P.S. Gharaunda, District Karnal.
Since both the FIRs have arisen out of similar controversy, therefore, for brevity common facts are being noticed.
4. FIR No.246 dated 20.08.2020 was registered at the instance of Dhajja Ram with the allegations that his sons namely Dharamvir and Dharampal run a dhaba in village Kohand, Tehsil Gharaunda, District Karnal. On 14.08.2020, Vikas @ Vikku (petitioner), Manish and Satish had committed loot after firing, giving threats and beatings. FIR No.389 dated 15.08.2020 was registered in this regard in the Police Station Gharaunda. Even after registration of the said FIR, these people started giving threats to the complainant and his sons for withdrawal of FIR. On 17.08.2020 at about 9.30 P.M., son of the complainant Dharamvir and complainant were sitting in the street in front of their house after taking meal. Vehicle of petitioner came to be stopped near the house. The petitioner along with Manish and Satish alighted from the car and ran towards the house of the complainant by giving lalkara. The complainant and his sons stood up on seeing them. Petitioner- Vikas @ Vikku fired from distance of about 10 steps away from the complainant with an intention to kill the complainant-party.
The fire went over their heads and sons of the complainant went inside the house. The complainant fell down there. The assailants were shouting that they will finish the entire family of the complainant on that day as they have not withdrawn the FIR.
Sons of the complainant also used force in their defence and on seeing the incident, the complainant became unconscious and thereafter he did not know what had happened there. After sometime, he regained the consciousness and saw that crowd was there along with police party. Satish and Manish had died.
It came to the notice of the complainant that the petitioner had ran away with weapons and vehicle. The complainant could not submit the complaint to the Police and the same was submitted on 20.08.2020.
5. In respect of deaths of Satish and Manish, FIR No.243 was registered on 18.08.2020 in Police Station Israna at the instance of Praveen. The prosecution story in the aforesaid FIR started with the allegation that the complainant-Praveen alleged that they were two brothers. Manish was elder and complainant was younger. Manish and his brother-in-law have one R.O. Plant jointly. Manish and Satish of the village were friends. On 14.08.2020, Dharambir got registered a case in Police Station Gharaunda, Karnal regarding attempt to rob and giving beatings against Vikas, Satish and others at Hotel Dharam near Kohand which is run by Dharambir, Dharam Pal, Rajbir sons of Dhajja Ram and Ajay, Vijay sons of Dharambir etc. None was arrested in that incident of 14.08.2020. On 17.08.2020 at about 8.30 P.M., Vikas came to meet brother of the complainant namely Manish at the R.O. Plant in his car and said that he had talked with Dharambir etc. in connection of the case for striking a compromise. He asked the brother of the complainant to go along with him at village Bandh so that the matter can be settled. On insistence of Vikas, brother of the complainant namely Manish, his brother-in-law Rajesh, complainant and Satish went in the car. When they reached near house of
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
