SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(P&H) 1185

ANOOP CHITKARA
Ruksar @ Ruksar Begam – Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab – Respondent


Advocates:
Mr. Ramneek Vasudeva, Advocate for the Appellant; Mr. Sidakmeet Singh Sandhu, AAG, Punjab; Ms. Rakhi Sharma, Amicus Curiae

JUDGMENT

Anoop Chitkara, J. - FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections 153 30.11.2019 Nangal, District Rupnagar 302 IPC (Section 201 IPC added subsequently.

1. The petitioner, incarcerating since Dec 3, 2019, upon her arrest in the FIR captioned above, has come up before this Court under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) seeking bail.

2. Para 27 of the bail application declares that the petitioner has no criminal history.

2 (a) The brief facts of the case are that the police recorded statement of complainant- Shaukat Ali under Section 154 Cr.P.C . in which he stated that his brother-Rasid Mohammad, who works as a labourer, was living separately with his wife Ruksaar (the petitioner). They have a 8 years old daughter, who is living with her maternal grand- parents at Kalka. Rashid Mohammad used to consume liquor. On this account there were misunderstanding between him and his wife. On 29.11.2019, Rasid (his brother) had reached home after consuming liquor and then both husband and wife had entered into an altercation. The complainant did not intervene because it was usual thing and their personal matter. In the morning around 8:30 A.M., Ruksaar-the petitioner contacte

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top