High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Arun vs State Of Haryana on 19 May, 2009

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Arun vs State Of Haryana on 19 May, 2009
Cr.Misc. NO. M 4341 of 2009                        1



IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

                                   Cr.Misc. NO. M 4341 of 2009

                                    DATE OF DECISION 19.5.2009

Arun

                                                   ......PETITIONER
                           VERSUS

State of Haryana .
                                                   ......RESPONDENTS

PRESENT:        Mr. RS Chauhan, Advocate
                Mr. SS Goripuria, DAG, Hry



M.M.S.BEDI,J.

The petitioner is alleged to be a member of an unlawful

assembly, which had attacked Ram Phal with different weapons, resulting

in his death as per the case lodged at the instance of his brother Multan

Singh complainant. The petitioner is alleged to have inflicted a lathi blow on

the person of the deceased.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the

petitioner is a young man of 19 years of age and is a student having been

falsely implicated in the case.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and gone

through the nature of the allegations against the petitioner that he had

attacked deceased Ram Phal with a lathi. Learned counsel for the

petitioner submits that a lathi has been planted in this case, which is not

good enough to cause the injury on the person of the deceased.

In view of the specific part having been attributed to the

petitioner and he being a member of an unlawful assembly, whose liability

is conjoined with the other accused, it will not be appropriate to grant the
Cr.Misc. NO. M 4341 of 2009 2

concession of bail to the petitioner.

Without expression of any opinion on the facts and

circumstances of the case, the petition is dismissed.

Anything said in the order will not prejudice the right of the

petitioner during trial. A direction is issued that the trial court will

expeditiously dispose of the trial as 29 witnesses seem to have been cited

by the prosecution agency.

May 19 ,2009                                   ( M.M.S.BEDI )
TSM                                                 JUDGE