Sonu v. State Of Haryana

-1213 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Decided on : 29.05.2024 Sonu ...... Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ...... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL Present : Mr. Sunil Saharan, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Deepshikha Chauhan, AAG, Haryana.

**** Manjari Nehru Kaul, J.(Oral) Instant petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking concession of regular bail in case FIR No.365 dated 25.05.2021 under Sections 323, 34, 506 IPC (Section 302 and 325 IPC added later on) registered at Police Station Sadar Hisar, District Hisar. 2.

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case, which is evident from the fact that two of the eyewitnesses i.e. Joginder @ Sutta and Harpal, who had intimated the complainant about the deceased being assaulted, had not supported the case of the prosecution during trial. Learned counsel has submitted that since the petitioner has now been in custody for almost three years having been arrested on 26.07.2021 and 12 witnesses still remain to

-2be examined, there is no possibility of the trial concluding in the near future and hence, he be extended the concession of bail, more so, when all the material witnesses stand examined. 3.

Learned counsel for the State while opposing the prayer made by the counsel opposite has not disputed the stage of trial, however, she submitted that the two most material witnesses i.e. complainant Bijender and Raj Singh, who had witnessed the occurrence in question; while deposing before the trial Court had given a vivid account of the mode and manner in which the deceased had been brutally and fatally assaulted by the petitioner. Learned State counsel has thus, asserted that merely because two witnesses were declared hostile during trial would not enure to the benefit of the petitioner in view of the complainant and Raj Singh corroborating the case of the prosecution. It has also been submitted that the trial shall not take much time to conclude as now only formal witnesses remain to be examined and the next date of hearing fixed before the trial Court is 24.07.2024.

4.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant material available on record.

5.

In the facts and circumstances as enumerated hereinabove coupled with the fact that trial would not take much time to conclude as only formal witnesses remain to be examined, this Court does not deem it fit to extend the concession of regular bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the instant petition is dismissed.

-36.

However, it is made clear that anything observed hereinabove shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

7.

At this stage, a prayer has been made by the learned counsel that the Trial Court be directed to conclude the trial expeditiously.

8.

Keeping in view the long incarceration of the petitioner, Trial Court concerned shall make earnest efforts to conclude the trial expeditiously in accordance with law, preferably within a period of four months from today.

29.05.2024 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) sonia JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No