Balraj @ Golli v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM No.M-3885 of 2019 (O&M) Date of Decision: February 26, 2019 Balraj @ Golli

...Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Haryana

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

Present:

Mr.Jitender Dhanda, Advocate for the petitioner.

**** INDERJIT SINGH, J.

Petitioner has filed this second petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.199 dated 14.04.2018 under Sections 341, 307, 506, 120-B, 201, 147, 148, 149 IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act, registered at Police Station Fatehabad. Notice of motion.

Mr.Navdeep Singh, AAG, Haryana, has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent-State and contested the petition. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record. From the record, I find that complainant Raghubir Singh made statement before the police alleging that on 14.04.2018 at about 8-8.15 p.m., when he was going to Grain Market, Fatehabad and reached near Senior VINEET GULATI 2019.02.27 16:27 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh Model School on Geeta Mandir, Road, he saw his son Sonu coming from

CRM No.M-3885 of 2019 -2opposite side. As soon as he reached in front of main gate of school, four boys namely Akash, Rohit, Pankaj and fourth unknown, riding on a motorcycle, came from the side of Ratia road. All the three boys, who were riding pillion, were armed with country made pistol. The complainant saw that Rohit fired a shot on right side of head of Sonu, due to which, Sonu fell down. On raising alarm, all the accused went towards Balmiki chowk and while leaving, Pankaj and unknown boy fired shots upon Sonu, which did not hit him. The complainant alleged that assailants attacked Sonu at the instance of Sanjay @ Dasi, Balraj @ Golli and Vikram @ Jannat. The only allegation of conspiracy is against the petitioner along with two other persons.

The petitioner has been in custody since 25.04.2018. He is not required for custodial interrogation as he is in judicial custody. The trial of the case will take long time. No useful purpose will be served by keeping the petitioner in custody till the disposal of the case. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, without discussing the facts in minute detail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing personal/surety bonds in the sum of `50,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate. February 26, 2019 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No VINEET GULATI 2019.02.27 16:27 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh