IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc. No. M-23153 of 2009
Date of decision : September 10, 2009
Sonu alias Shinder Pal
....Petitioner
versus
State of Punjab
....Respondent
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice L.N. Mittal
Present : Mr. IPS Kohli, Advocate, for the petitioner
Mr. Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, AAG Punjab
L.N. Mittal, J. (Oral)
Sonu alias Shinder Pal has filed this petition for anticipatory
bail in case FIR No. 13 dated 26.2.2009 under section 395 IPC, Police
Station Behram, S.B.S. Nagar (Nawanshahar).
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
case file.
According to the prosecution version, 5/6 young persons
including the petitioner tres-passed into house of complainant Narinder
Kaur at about 1.00 AM on night intervening 25/26-2-2009, armed with
sword, dattar and iron rods and started throwing articles out of Almirah, like
searching something. One of them attacked the complainant with his sword
but the complainant ducked and saved herself. Her cry attracted other
family members. They also cried. The aforesaid culprits thereupon ran
Criminal Misc. No. M-23153 of 2009 -2-
away. Complainant and her family members followed the culprits. There
was a Qualis vehicle parked outside. One of the assailants fell down
whereas the other escaped in the vehicle. The boy who had fallen down
disclosed his name as Manoj Kumar alias Mani and also disclosed the
names of his companions as Kamaljit alias Soma, Sonu i.e. petitioner and
one Parveen Kumar and did not disclose the names of the remaining two
persons. However, Manoj Kumar also gave slip and escaped on account of
darkness. One mobile telephone, one camera and some cash amount were
found missing.
Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that, in fact,
petitioner’s co-accused Parveen Kumar had married with the daughter of the
complainant against the wishes of the complainant and they were called to
the house of the complainant for settling the matter but instead of doing so,
the complainant’s daughter was kept there and this false FIR was registered.
It is contended that Parveen Kumar filed habeas corpus petition in this
Court in which complainant’s daughter appeared and stated that she wanted
to live with her husband Parveen Kumar.
On the other hand, learned State counsel contended that mobile
telephone which had been taken away by the culprits has since been
recovered from petitioner’s co-accused Kamaljit Singh alias Sonu. It is
also contended that a serious attack was made on the complainant but she
saved herself by ducking. It is also contended that proceedings for
declaring petitioner as proclaimed offender have already been initiated.
The petitioner has been evading arrest for six months.
Keeping in view the serious allegations that the petitioner along
with his co-accused entered into house of the complainant at odd hour of
Criminal Misc. No. M-23153 of 2009 -3-
the night and took away mobile phone, camera and cash amount, the
petitioner, in my considered view, does not deserve the concession of
anticipatory bail. The instant petition is accordingly dismissed but without
meaning to express any opinion on merits.
( L.N. Mittal )
September 10, 2009 Judge
'dalbir'