Rama Nand Verma v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 04.07.2018 Rama Nand Verma ..Petitioner

Versus

The State of Punjab ..Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY

Present:

Mr. K.S. Lakhanpal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Rahul Rathore, DAG, Punjab for the respondent -State.

*** Daya Chaudhary, J. (Oral) The present petition has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of petitioner-Rama Nand Verma for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.44 dated 03.03.2016 registered under Sections 406 and 420 of Indian Penal Code at Police Station Mukerian, District Hoshiarpur, Punjab. The petitioner was arrested on 10.06.2016 and he along with his co-accused, namely, Priya Verma filed a petition for grant of bail, which was dismissed vide order dated 26.02.2018 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur. Thereafter, co-accused-Priya Verma filed Criminal Misc. No. M-15733 of 2018 before this Court and said petition was allowed vide order dated 26.04.2018.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the case whereas there is no evidence against him to prove that he has given fake gold to the complainant or any other

person. The family members of the petitioner belong to Goldsmith class and they are having their shops in Mukerian, District Hoshiarpur. The complaint was made by the complainant just to pressurize the petitioner to settle accounts with the complainant. Learned counsel further submits that coaccused of the petitioner, namely, Priya Verma along with the petitioner filed bail application before the lower Court, which was dismissed but she has been released on regular bail by this Court vide order dated 26.04.2018. Learned counsel also submits that the case of the petitioner is at par with his co-accused-Priya Verma. The trial may take some time to conclude. Learned counsel also submits that no purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody as nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner.

The petitioner is in custody since 10.06.2016. Learned counsel also submits that there is no apprehension that the petitioner may abscond or tamper with the prosecution evidence and he undertakes to abide by all terms and conditions to be imposed by this Court or by the trial Court. Learned State counsel has not disputed the custody period as well as the fact that co-accused-Priya Verma has been released on regular bail.

Heard arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned State counsel and have also perused the contents of the FIR and other documents available on the file.

Admittedly, the petitioner was arrested on 10.06.2016 and his co-accused-Priya Verma has been released on regular bail by this Court vide order dated 26.04.2018. The case is triable by the Magistrate. The petitioner is ready to abide by all terms and conditions to be imposed by this Court or

by the trial Court.

Keeping in view the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner (Rama Nand Verma) is directed to be released on regular bail subject to his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court by considering the period undergone by him and on parity with co-accused-Priya Verma. 04.07.201 8 (DAYA CHAUDHARY) neetu JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether Reportable No