Cr.Misc. NO. M 2942 of 2009(O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Cr.Misc. NO. M 2942 of 2009(O&M)
DATE OF DECISION 4.5.2009
Randhir Singh @ Dheera
......PETITIONER
VERSUS
State of Haryana
......RESPONDENTS
PRESENT: Mr. Bs Rathee, Advocate
Mr. SS Goripuria, DAG, Hry
M.M.S.BEDI,J.
The petitioner seeks the concession of regular bail in a case
registered at the instance of Manjit alleging that after the death of her
husband Rajinder Singhh, she had married with Sandip. She started
staying with Sandip along with her two children at Rohtak. The family
members of Sandip had hand over the custody of her children Deepak and
Deepika through the police to the family members of her former husband
Rajinder Singh. She had filed a petition in the High Court seeking the
custody of the children, which was decided on 19.2.2007 permitting her to
retain the children for five days in a week and for two days i.e Saturday
and Sunday the children had to be sent to their grand parents. On the day
of the occurrence, the complainant along with her husband Sandip, Kala,
Ved Pal, Pardeep, Kuldip and Sandip(2) sons of Sandip’s maternal uncle
had hired a taxi from Rohtak to give the custody of the children to their
grand mother. At about 2/2.30 PM, the children were handed over to Gaje
Singh, resident of Dupedi through the police and left for Rohtak. While
going back, Sandip had persuaded the complainant to go to village Dupedi
Cr.Misc. NO. M 2942 of 2009(O&M) 2
for some time. When they had reached home, they were attacked by
Pappu, Gaje Singh, Kartar Singh, Ajmer Singh, Krishan, Tejbir etc. The
petitioner was a member of an unlawful assembly, armed with a jailly . He
being a member of an unlawful assembly had caused injuries on the
person of the complainant.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the main
accused has been granted the concession of bail.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through
the order of this court granting bail to Pappu. Pappu had been granted bail
as a gun shot had been attributed to him on the person of the deceased
but as a matter of fact there was no gun shot injury. On account of the said
patent controversy he was granted bail. The case of the petitioner cannot
be treated at par with his co-accused. The chances of tampering with the
evidence cannot be ruled out in view of the seriousness of the crime.
The petition is dismissed.
May 4 ,2009 ( M.M.S.BEDI ) TSM JUDGE