Charanjiv Arora Alias Ricky v. State Of Ut Chandigarh

CRM-M No.15996 of 2024 2024:PHHC:047398

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.15996 of 2024 Date of Decision: 08.04.2024 CHARANJIV ARORA ALIAS RICKY ......Petitioner Vs STATE OF UT CHANDIGARH ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA

Present:

Ms. Tanu Bedi, Advocate with Mr. Akhil Dadwal, Advocate and Mr. Abhimanyu Jairath, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Akashdeep Singh, Addl. P.P. UT, Chandigarh. **** HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) 1.

By way of present petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C., prayer has been made for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.207 dated 16.12.2023 registered under Sections 379-A, 34 IPC (Sections 411, 473 IPC added later on) at Police Station South, Sector 34, Chandigarh. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been involved primarily under Section 411 IPC.

3.

The prayer made on behalf of the petitioner has been opposed by learned Addl. Public Prosecutor by referring to the involvement of the petitioner in two cases of similar nature.

4.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper book. I find substance in the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

MOHMED ATIK 2024.04.09 09:38 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

CRM-M No.15996 of 2024 2024:PHHC:047398 5.

In the present case, the investigation has already been concluded with the filing of challan on 19.02.2024 and the petitioner is behind the bars for a period of more than 03 months and the trial is likely to take some time in its culmination as there are 20 prosecution witnesses. Moreover, as regards involvement of the petitioner in two more cases of similar nature, in one of the case the petitioner has already been granted concession of regular bail vide order dated 08.04.2024 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in CRM-M No.16003 of 2024 and in the other case reply is yet to be filed by the State. 6.

Considering the fact that the petitioner has already suffered incarceration for a period of almost 09 months and the trial is likely to take sometime in its culmination, I do not find any justification to extend the incarceration of the petitioner.

7.

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, subject to his furnishing adequate bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate. 8.

It is made clear that this order may not be construed as expression of an opinion on the merits of the case.

(HARKESH MANUJA) April 08, 2024 JUDGE Atik Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No MOHMED ATIK 2024.04.09 09:38 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment