ANOOP CHITKARA
Satnam @ Babbu – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Anoop Chitkara, J.
| FIR No. | Dated | Police Station | Sections |
| 005 | 14.06.2021 | Cyber Crime, Hisar, District Hisar | 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 201, 120-B IPC 1860 read with Section 66C, 66D of Information Technology Act, 2000. |
1. The petitioner, incarcerating upon his arrest in the FIR captioned above, came up before this Court under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) seeking regular bail.
2. In Para 19 of the bail application, the petitioner declares no criminal history.
3. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner contends that the custodial investigation would serve no purpose whatsoever, and the pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and family.
4. Learned State counsel has opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner.
REASONING:
5. A prima facie perusal of Para 6 & 7 of the bail petition makes out a case for bail. Further, the petitioner is in custody since 16.07.2021.
6. In Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab, 1980 (2) SCC 565, (Para 30), a Constitutional Bench of Supreme Court held that the bail decis
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.