High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/13286/2017allowed

Amit Kumar v. State Of Haryana

2017-05-03Mrs. Justice Raj Rahul Garg2 pages

CRM-M-13286-2017 (O&M) -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-14266-2017 in/and CRM-M-13286-2017 Date of Decision:- 03.05.2017 Amit Kumar ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ....Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI

Present:

Mr. HPS Ishar, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Himmat Singh, DAG, Haryana.

**** RITU BAHRI, J. (Oral) CRM-14266-2017 Heard.

For the reasons mentioned in the application, the hearing of main petition is preponed and is taken on today's board of this Court. CRM-M-13286-2017 Present petition is for release of petitioner on regular bail in FIR No.42 dated 12.07.2016, under Sections 363, 506 IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act, registered at Police Station Woman, District Panchkula. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and he is in custody since 12.07.2016. Moreover, with regard to allegation under Section 363 IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act is concerned, no role has been attributed to the Naresh Kumar 2017.05.05 16:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh present petitioner.

CRM-M-13286-2017 (O&M) -2Learned State counsel, on instructions from investigating officer, has informed that out of total 19 witnesses, only three have been examined. Moreover, he is not disputing the contents of the above-said application.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and with their able assistance gone through the material available on record. The petitioner was arrested on 12.07.2016. Since then, he is in judicial custody and no useful purpose would be served to further detain him in jail. The final conclusion of trial will take a long time. In view of above facts, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on her furnishing adequate bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned trial Judge/Duty Magistrate, Panchkula.

Needless to mention that, nothing observed here-in-above, would reflect, on merits in the trial of the main case, in any manner. May 03, 2017 ( RITU BAHRI ) naresh.k JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No Naresh Kumar 2017.05.05 16:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh