ANOOP CHITKARA
Sakir – Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Anoop Chitkara, J.
FIR No. | Dated | Police Station | Sections |
132 | 23.02.2022 | Gohana City, District Sonipat | 406, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC |
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 (Cr.P.C) seeking bail.
2. In paragraph 11 of the bail petition, the accused declares that he has no criminal antecedents.
3. The complainant, who deals with the sale and purchase of car, has alleged that the petitioners ran away with the Verna car after forcibly alighting his salesman.
4. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner contends that the pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and family.
5. Ld. counsel representing the State opposes bail.
REASONING:
6. The petitioner is a first offender, and one of the relevant factors would be to provide an opportunity to course-correct. Even a primafacie perusal of paragraph 4 of the bail petition needs consideration for bail.
7. In Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v State of Punjab, 1980 (2) SCC 565, (Para 30), a Constitutional Bench of Supreme Court held that the bail decision must enter the cumulative effect of the variety of circumstan
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.