AMANDEEP Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been filed by the petitioner for setting aside the order dated 02.12.2019 passed by the Illaqa Magistrate, whereby, after re-addition of Section 307 IPC, the Investigating Officer has been ordered to re-arrest the petitioner in case FIR No.343 dated 01.08.2019 registered under Sections 148, 149, 323, 324, 325, 307, 506, 427 and 120B IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act, 1959 at Police Station Sadar Thanesar, District Kurukshetar.

(2.) It is submitted by counsel for the petitioner that the case against the petitioner is totally concocted. Although in the first instance, the offence under Section 307 IPC was invoked by the Police, however, after the inquiry at their own level, the said Section was deleted by the Police.

(3.) Earlier, the petitioner was arrested in this case. However, the petitioner was granted bail pending trial. During the investigation, the Police claim to have recovered only a danda from the petitioner. Now, the Police are again invoking Section 307 IPC in the case. Hence, the Police had sought permission from the Magistrate to arrest the petitioner. Accordingly, the impugned order has been passed by the Court below. It is further submitted by counsel for the petitioner that while passing the impugned order, the Court below has not given any specific reason, as to for what purpose the petitioner would be required to be arrested. Still further, it is submitted that since on the same set of facts, the petitioner was arrested earlier and was granted bail pending trial by the Court, therefore, merely invoking Section 307 IPC once again, cannot be the sole ground for re-arresting the petitioner, and thereby, depriving him of his right to liberty. It is also submitted that the petitioner would appear before the trial Court regularly. Therefore, the petitioner need not be arrested.