Rajan Alias Mantri v. State Of Haryana

In The High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh Date of Decision:- 24.03.2023 Rajan @ Mantri ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL Present:- Mr. Jangjit Singh Dahiya, Advocates, for the petitioner. Mr. Gurmeet Singh, AAG, Haryana, assisted by ASI Sanjay Kumar.

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

The petitioner seeks grant of regular bail in respect of a case registered against him vide FIR No.222, dated 24.12.2021, Police Station Sanoli, District Panipat, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC and Sections 7, 13(I) d of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

2.

The allegations, in nutshell, are that a secret information was received by the police to the effect that Vikas had procured a Passport by impersonating himself as Deepak on the basis of forged documents. When the police verification was conducted, one Amit and Bajinder had identified him as Deepak. The role attributed to the petitioner is

- 2 - that it was on the asking of the petitioner that Amit and Bajinder had identified said Vikas as Deepak.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has falsely been implicated in the present case and that since Amit and Bajinder who had actually identified the impersonator had already been granted bail, the petitioner who has been behind bars for the last more than 8 months also deserves the same concession on the ground of parity. 4.

Opposing the petition, learned State counsel has submitted that the petitioner had played a pivotal role in the issuance of a Passport to an impersonator and as a matter of fact Vikas in whose favour the Passport had been issued in the name of Deepak is a gangster involved in several cases and even the petitioner is also involved in 10 other cases. Learned State counsel has however, informed that challan already stands presented, though charges are yet to be framed and as many as 20 PWs have been cited. Learned State counsel has filed custody certificate, as per which the petitioner has been behind bars for the last about 8 months and 16 days. 5.

This Court has considered the rival submissions. 6.

It is a specific case of the prosecution that during investigation it had surfaced that it is the petitioner at whose instance Amit and Bajinder had wrongly identified Vikas to be Deepak which led to issuance of a Passport in his favour. In any case, this Court cannot overlook the fact that the petitioner has been behind bars for a substantial period of more than 8 months. The trial has not even commenced till date and as many as 20 PWs have been cited. In these circumstances, further

- 3 - detention of the petitioner will not serve any useful purpose as conclusion of trial will take time. The petition, as such, is accepted and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned. 24.03.2023 ( GURVINDER SINGH GILL) mohan JUDGE Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No