Harpal Singh @ Lillu vs State of Haryana

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(P&H) 729

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
KULDEEP TIWARI
Harpal Singh @ Lillu – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Sandeep Saini, Advocate, Mr. J.S. Brar, Advocate Mr. Aman Pal, Advocate, Mr. Rajender Kumar, Advocate and Ms. Sweta Beniwal, Advocate, Mr. Dinesh Sharma, Advocate for Ms. Veena Hooda, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. Pankaj Mulwani, DAG, Haryana; Mr. Namit Khurana, Advocate and Mr. Parth Aneja, Advocate, for respondent No.2/complainant in all the cases

JUDGMENT :

Kuldeep Tiwari, J.

CRM-19397-2024 in CRA-S-1770-2024

For the good and valid reasons assigned in the application, the delay of 406 days in filing the appeal, is condoned.

Application stands disposed of accordingly.

CRM-13373-2024 in CRA-S-1209-2024

For the good and valid reasons assigned in the application, the delay of 245 days in filing the appeal, is condoned.

Application stands disposed of accordingly.

Main Case(s)

1. All the four above mentioned instant appeals are amenable to be decided together, as the common relief of regular bail has been sought therein, in case FIR No.164, dated 16.04.2022, under Sections 148, 149, 302, 307, 323, 506, 379-B, 120-B and 201 of the IPC, 1860, and under Sections 25 and 29 of the Arms Act, 1959, and Section 3 of Schedule Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, registered at Police Station Sector-17, HUDA, Jagadhri, Yamuna Nagar, therefore, all the above instant appeals are taken up together for adjudication.

FACTS OF THE CASE

2. The instant FIR, has been registered on a statement suffered by one namely, Mohit Sharma, who is alleged to be an injured eye witness. The relevant extract of the statement, which become the bed