Parveen v. State Of Haryana

 


 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-13626-2020 (O&M) Date of decision: - 29.06.2020 Parveen

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana .....Respondent



   







      



     





****    

      

    !   " !"  ".

Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail in case FIR No. 67 dated 19.02.2016 registered under Sections 395, 397 IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act (deleted later on) at Police Station Sadar Panipat, District Panipat. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the alleged FIR was registered on the statement of Manjeet Jaglan-complainant. No role has been attributed to the petitioner and he has been in custody since 05.05.2017 even there was no evidence against him. Co-accused Baru @ Satish @ Kala, Sanjay and Rohit have been granted bail, vide orders dated 03.03.2020 and 19.05.2020 respectively (Annexure P-3 and P-4). He prays for regular bail of the petitioner on parity with co-accused Rohit. MANGAL SINGH 2020.06.29 05:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

 


 
 Learned State counsel has not disputed the fact regarding the custody period of the petitioner and further states that out of 34 prosecution witnesses, 9 prosecution witnesses have been examined. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner has been in custody since 05.05.2017 and coaccused have been granted bail, the trial will take time to conclude and no useful purpose would be served by detaining the petitioner behind the bars. # $   % $! &&"

 "   &   ! !          $

      %    "!  %             !'!

" 

   

     (  ' ") *'+ (  %) *'+ MANGAL SINGH 2020.06.29 05:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document