High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/2687/2019dismissed

Sunil v. State Of Haryana

2019-04-11Mr. Justice Arvind Singh Sangwan2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-2687-2019 Date of decision: April 11, 2019 Sunil ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN

Present:

Mr. Ajay Arora, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Deepak Grewal, DAG, Haryana.

ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, J. (Oral) Prayer made in the petition is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.92 dated 26.2.2018 under Sections 302/34 IPC registered at Police Station City, Dabwali.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the allegations in the FIR registered on the statement of Kuldeep Singh it is stated that on 26.2.2018, Ramandeep Singh has caused murder of his brother Krishan Pal. Later on, during the investigation, the police recorded the statement of two eye-witnesses Balwinder Singh and Nasib Kaur and the petitioner was arrested. Counsel for the petitioner has further argued that as per the statement of the eye-witnesses, the petitioner has not caused any injury to deceased Krishan Pal and his only role is that he was accompanying the main accused Ramandeep Singh.

Counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner is in custody for about one year and the conclusion of the trial will take some time.

SATISH KUMAR 2019.04.12 15:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-2687-2019 -2In reply, the learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Charanjit Singh, has stated that all the prosecution witnesses have already been examined and both the eye-witnesses Balwinder Singh and Nasib Kaur have identified the petitioner in the Court. Learned State counsel submits that the case is now fixed for recording the statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and the case is at the final stage of arguments. After hearing counsel for the parties, considering the stage of the case as well as the allegations levelled against the petitioner, who was identified by both the eye-witnesses, I do not found any ground to grant the regular bail to the petitioner.

Dismissed.

( ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN ) April 11, 2019 JUDGE satish Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No SATISH KUMAR 2019.04.12 15:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document