NAVEEN DAHIYA Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Bail petitioner is one of the three accused persons in FIR No.215/2017 dated 07.8.2017 registered at Police Station Sadar District Solan, H.P. under Sections 302, 392, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act.

(2.) Prosecution case in brief is that:-

(3.) Though bail petition does not plead any specific gounds for release, however, learned Senior Counsel for the bail petitioner argued that there has been no proper identification of the bail petitioner to connect him with the alleged crime. The petitioner had not come out from the car. He was driving the vehicle and was on the driver seat of the vehicle. It was the other two accused persons i.e. Himmat alias Cheeku alias Sonu and Vipin who had alighted from the car and were involved in the commission of crime. Learned Senior Counsel also submitted that Section 34 IPC will not be attracted to the facts of the case as it was a case of sudden road rage. Referring to the statements of PW-1 Sh. Lal Chand Sharma and PW-2 Shri Bhim Singh, learned Senior Counsel submitted that no case against the petitioner was made out. Therefore, learned Senior Counsel prayed that the bail petitioner deserves to be enlarged on bail.