Supreme Court – Daily Orders
The State Of Haryana vs Subhash on 17 January, 2025
Author: Bela M. Trivedi
Bench: Bela M. Trivedi
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2025
(@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO. 2054/2024)
THE STATE OF HARYANA APPELLANT
VERSUS
SUBHASH RESPONDENT
WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2025
(@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO. 2449/2024)
THE STATE OF HARYANA APPELLANT
VERSUS
SAJJAN RESPONDENT
O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. The present appeals are directed against the orders dated
08.02.2022 and 28.02.2022 passed by the High Court of Punjab
and Haryana at chandigarh, in CRM-M-485-2022 & CRM-M-6799-2022
respectively, whereby the High Court has granted anticipatory
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
bail to the respondents, viz., Subhash [Respondent in Criminal
POOJA SHARMA
Date: 2025.01.20
16:59:46 IST
Reason:
Appeal @ SLP(Criminal) No. 2054/2024] and Sajjan [Respondent
1
in Criminal Appeal @ SLP(Criminal) No. 2449/2024], who were
declared proclaimed offenders by the concerned Court after
following the procedure under Section 82/83 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant-State has
placed heavy reliance on the decision of this Court
rendered on 29.08.2023, in Criminal Appeal No. 2635 of
2023, titled State of Haryana Vs. Dharamraj, whereby this
Court had allowed the appeal preferred by the State of
Haryana against the co-accused Dharamraj, and set aside the
impugned order granting anticipatory bail to the said co-
accused.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents, however, is not in a
position to distinguish the role of the respondents, viz.,
Subhash and Sajjan from that of the co-accused Dharamraj,
whose anticipatory bail has been cancelled by this Court.
5. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the parties and to the decision of this Court
in the case of Dharamraj (supra), we are of the opinion
that the respondents – Subhash and Sajjan stand on the same
footing as that of the co-accused Dharamraj. Both the
respondents-accused had remained absconded and were
declared proclaimed offenders, and therefore, the High
Court has committed gross error in granting anticipatory
bail to the respondents.
6. Keeping in view the decision passed in Dharamraj (supra),
2
cancelling the anticipatory bail granted to the co-accused
Dharamraj, we are inclined to accept the present appeals
preferred by the State on the same lines as that of the
Dharamraj.
7. Consequently, the impugned orders dated 08.02.2022 and
28.02.2022 passed by the High Court are set aside. The
appeals are allowed.
8. The respondents – Subhash and Sajjan shall surrender before
the concerned Trial Court within four weeks from today. It
goes without saying that both the respondents shall be at
liberty to file appropriate applications seeking regular
bail as may be permissible under the law, and if such
applications are filed, the same shall be decided on
merits.
9. Pending applications are disposed of.
………………J.
(BELA M. TRIVEDI)
………………J.
(PRASANNA B. VARALE)
NEW DELHI;
JANUARY 17, 2025.
3 SLP(Crl.) No. 2054/2024 ITEM NO.39 COURT NO.11 SECTION II-B S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 2054/2024
[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 08-02-2022
in CRM-M No. 485/2022 passed by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana
at Chandigarh]
THE STATE OF HARYANA PETITIONER
VERSUS
SUBHASH RESPONDENT
(IA No. 25505/2024 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED
JUDGMENT, IA No. 25503/2024 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No.
25506/2024 – PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/
ANNEXURES
WITH
SLP(Crl) No. 2449/2024 (II-B)
(IA No. 10019/2024 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED
JUDGMENT, IA No. 10022/2024 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No.
10025/2024 – PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/
ANNEXURES)
Date : 17-01-2025 These matters were called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE BELA M. TRIVEDI
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASANNA B. VARALE
For Petitioner(s) :
Dr. Hemant Gupta, A.A.G.
Mr. Samar Vijay Singh, AORFor Respondent(s) :
Mr. Nisarg Choudhary, AOR
Mr. Mukul Mehra, Adv.
Mr. Dushyant Mudgil, Adv.
4
SLP(Crl.) No. 2054/2024
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. The appeals are allowed in terms of the signed order. The
operative portion of the order reads as under:
“6. Keeping in view the decision passed in
Dharamraj (supra), cancelling the anticipatory
bail granted to the co-accused Dharamraj, we are
inclined to accept the present appeals preferred
by the State on the same lines as that of the
Dharamraj.
7. Consequently, the impugned orders dated
08.02.2022 and 28.02.2022 passed by the High Court
are set aside. The appeals are allowed.
8. The respondents – Subhash and Sajjan shall
surrender before the concerned Trial Court within
four weeks from today. It goes without saying that
both the respondents shall be at liberty to file
appropriate applications seeking regular bail as
may be permissible under the law, and if such
applications are filed, the same shall be decided
on merits.
9. Pending applications are disposed of.”
(POOJA SHARMA) (MAMTA RAWAT)
COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)
(Signed order is placed on the file.)5
[ad_1]
Source link