High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/7775/2020allowed

Sachin v. State Of Haryana

2020-09-04Mr. Justice Harnaresh Singh Gill2 pages

CRM-M No. 7775 of 2020 -1In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh CRM-M No. 7775 of 2020 (O&M) Date of Decision: 04.9.2020 Sachin ......Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL

Present:

Mr. Vishal Garg Narwana, Advocate and Ms. Minaz Khan, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Ramesh Kumar Ambavta, AAG, Haryana.

**** HARNARESH SINGH GILL , J. (ORAL) Case is taken up for hearing through video conferencing. The petitioner seeks regular bail in FIR No. 273 dated 22.6.2019 under Sections 302, 323, 34 IPC (Sections 216, 307 and 120-B IPC were added later on) and Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 registered at Police Station Gannaur, District Sonipat.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the disclosure statement suffered by the petitioner, he kept standing on the gate of the house with an iron rod so that nobody could enter the house. He further submits that even as per complainant-Narender @ Popi, his uncle Sanjay had died due to gun shot injury and the said injury has been attributed to Kuldeep @ Kaldu. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has been in custody since 22.6.2019. Learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Virender, submits that FIR No. 112 dated 17.10.2018 under Sections 324/34 IPC and GURPREET SINGH 2020.09.04 17:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chadigarh

CRM-M No. 7775 of 2020 -2FIR No. 609 dated 24.11.2018 under Section 68 of the Excise Act, registered at Police Station Ganaur, Sonipat, are also pending against the petitioner. It is further submitted that charges have been framed on 22.8.2019.

It is a case in which the only allegation against the petitioner is that he was standing outside the house with an iron rod. The petitioner has been in custody since 22.6.2019 and moreover, charges have been framed on 22.8.2019. The trial will take time to conclude. No useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars. Without commenting anything on the merits of the case, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate.

(HARNARESH SINGH GILL) JUDGE September 04, 2020 Gurpreet Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No GURPREET SINGH 2020.09.04 17:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chadigarh