Rajbinder Singh v. State Of Punjab

CRM No.M-1940 of 2015 -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM No.M-1940 of 2015 Date of Decision: - 30.01.2015 Rajbinder Singh .....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab .....Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR

Present:

Mr. Aman Pal, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. J.S. Sekhon, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for the State.

**** M EHINDER S INGH S ULLAR , J.(oral) Petitioner has preferred the instant petition for the grant of regular bail, in a case registered against him along with his other co-accused Ranjodh Singh alias Jodha, Santokh Singh sons of Pargat Singh, Pargat Singh son of Puran Singh and Puran Singh son of Natha Singh, vide FIR No.135 dated 03.08.2013, on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 120-B IPC, by the police of Police Station Zira, District Ferozepur. 2.

Notice of the petition was issued to the State. 3.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, going through the record with their valuable help and after deep consideration of the entire matter, to my mind, the present petition for regular bail deserves to be accepted in this context.

NARESH KUMAR 2011.03.12 14:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CRM No.M-1940 of 2015 -24.

What cannot possibly be disputed here is that neither the name of the petitioner is mentioned nor any other specific role is attributed to him in the original complaint, which formed the basis of the FIR. All the main allegations of sending the complainant abroad and receipt of amount in question are assigned to other main indicated accused (non-petitioners).

5.

Moreover, the petitioner has himself surrendered on 21.11.2014. Since then, he is in judicial custody and no useful purpose would be served to further detain him in jail. There is no history of his previous involvement in any other criminal case. All the offences alleged against the accused are triable by the Court of Magistrate. Even, since the charges have not yet been framed against the accused, so, the final conclusion of trial will naturally take a long time. 6.

In the light of aforesaid reasons, taking into consideration the totality of facts and circumstances, emanating from the record, as discussed here-in-above and without commenting further anything on merits, lest it may prejudice the case of either side during the course of trial, the instant petition for regular bail is hereby accepted. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing adequate bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court. Needless to mention that, nothing observed here-in-above, would reflect, in any manner, on merits in the trial of the main case, as the same has been so recorded for a limited purpose of deciding the present petition for regular bail only.

January 30, 2015 (MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR) naresh.k JUDGE NARESH KUMAR 2011.03.12 14:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh