Sonu @ Sunil Kumar v. State Of Haryana

Crl.Misc. No.M-16445 of 2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH.

Crl.Misc. No.M-16445 of 2015 Date of Decision : 8.6.2015 Sonu @ Sunil Kumar .......Petitioner Vs.

State of Haryana ......Respondent ...

CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK ...

Present :

Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. .....

1. To be referred to the Reporter or not ?

2. Whether the judgement should be reported in Digest ? RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK, J Petitioner seeks bail pending trial in FIR No.356 dated 21.9.2014 under Sections 148, 149, 427, 436, 452, 285, 336, 292, 342, 307 IPC 3(2) (III) (V) of SC ST Act, 1989 and Section 25 of the Arms Act, registered at Police Station Madhuban, Distt. Karnal.

Notice to Advocate General, Haryana.

On the asking of the court, Mr. Deepak K. Grewal, DAG, Haryana, accepts notice.

Learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance on the order dated 13.5.2015 passed by this court in Crl. Misc.No.M-14622 of 2015 (Madan Lal @ Maddi Vs. State of Haryana), wherein co-accused of the petitioner had been granted the concession of bail pending trial. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is identically placed and he is also entitled GREESH SAHNI 2015.06.09 10:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

Crl.Misc. No.M-16445 of 2015 for the same concession, which was granted by this court to his co-accused Madan Lal.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits that case of the present petitioner is distinguishable from his co-accused Madan Lal. He prays for dismissal of the present petition.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after careful perusal of the record of the case, particularly the order dated 13.5.2015 in Madan Lal's case (supra), this court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner has been found entitled for bail pending trial. It is so said, because despite having made his best efforts, learned counsel for the State could not distinguish the case of the present petitioner from his co-accused namely Madan Lal. It is also a matter of record that Madan Lal, co-accused of the present petitioner was granted the concession of bail by this court, vide above said order dated 13.5.2015.

In view of the above and without commenting any further in this regard, lest it should prejudice the rights of either of the parties, present petition is allowed. Petitioner is directed to be released on bail pending trial on his furnishing adequate bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial court/Duty Magistrate, Karnal.

Disposed of, accordingly.

8.6.2015 (RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK) GS JUDGE GREESH SAHNI 2015.06.09 10:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh