Munish Goyal v. State Of Haryana

In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh CRM-M-14919-2022 (O&M) Date of Decision:-28.9.2022 Munish Goyal ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL Present:- Mr. A.D.S.Sukhija, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rajiv Sidhu, DAG, Haryana, assisted by ASI Krishan Chandar.

***** GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J. (Oral) 1.

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking grant of regular bail in respect of a case registered vide FIR No.597, dated 24.9.2019, Police Station City Sohna, District Gurugram, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 of Indian Penal Code.

2.

The allegations, in nutshell, are that Sudeep Sharma, who had been working as a Professor in GD Goneka University, Sohna Road, Gurugram, had furnished a Ph.D. Degree purported to have been issued by German University. However, when the University Authorities got the same verified, the same was found to be a forged degree.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been nominated as an accused on the basis of a disclosure statement made by PANKAJ KAKKAR 2022.09.28 19:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

( 2 ) CRM-M-14919-2022 (O&M) Sudeep Sharma and that no sanctity can be attached to such like disclosure statement particularly when Sudeep Sharma himself has been changing his stand and initially he had named one Sunil as the person, who had deceived him by providing a fake degree but subsequently he named the petitioner as the person, who had defrauded him. Learned counsel has submitted that the petitioner, in any case, has been behind bars since the last more than 6 months and challan stands presented, he is not required to be detained any longer.

4.

Opposing the petition, learned State counsel has submitted that since there is definite evidence to establish the complicity of the petitioner, no case for grant of bail is made out. It has been informed that the petitioner happens to be involved in one more identical case. It has also been informed that the petitioner otherwise has been behind bars since the last more than 6 months and that challan already stands presented.

5.

This Court has considered rival submissions.

6.

Having regard to the aforestated facts and circumstances but without commenting anything as regards merits of the case and while noticing that the petitioner has been behind bars since the last more than 6 months and challan alreadys stands presented, further detention of the petitioner will not serve any useful purpose. The petition, as such, is accepted and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned.

28.9.2022 ( Gurvinder Singh Gill ) pankaj Judge Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No PANKAJ KAKKAR 2022.09.28 19:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document