Rahul v. State Of Haryana
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH CRM-M-7511-2022 (O&M) Date of Decision: 08.07.2022 RAHUL
STATE OF HARYANA
!
"
# # $% &'()*'*+,*,'
-,.-.* ',*/0(''%1 &
"2 " 3
#4 #4$% 5 # 5 #
'-*+,*,' # #
4 /
#4
44 4 ', Per contra, while opposing the prayer for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, learned State counsel does not dispute the custody AMAN JAIN 2022.07.08 18:30 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment
CRM-M-7511-2022 (O&M) -2period of the petitioner. He, however, submits that though the petitioner has not been named in the FIR, yet the fact remains that he had actively participated in the occurrence and that as per the tower location and call record, the petitioner along with the co-accused was found present at the place of occurrence. He further submits that on the disclosure statement of the petitioner, Rs.37,000/- was recovered and that there are total 15 prosecution witnesses, out of whom none has been examined, so far. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner has been in custody since 13.06.2021. Petitioner has been indicted on the basis of the disclosure statement of the co-accused. The only allegation against the petitioner is of conspiracy. All the prosecution witnesses are yet to be examined. In such circumstances, the trial of the case would take a long time to conclude. Therefore, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars.
In view of the above and without commenting anything on the merits of the case, lest it should prejudice the case of either side, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.
46
AMAN JAIN 2022.07.08 18:30 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment