← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/3199/2016allowed

Roshni v. State Of Haryana

2016-09-28Mrs. Justice Raj Rahul Garg2 pages

CRM-M-3199-2016 and -1CRM-M-7756-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH (1) CRM-M-3199-2016 Roshni

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ..Respondent (2) CRM-M-7756-2016 Hari Om

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ..Respondent Date of decision: - 28.09.2016

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI

Present:

Mr. Sandeep Gahlawat, Advocate, for the petitioners.

Ms. Mahima Yashpal, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. **** RITU BAHRI, J. (Oral) As identical questions of law and facts are involved, therefore, I propose to decide above indicated petitions, arising out of the same incident/FIR, by means of this common judgment, in order to avoid the repetition.

Present petitions are for release of petitioners on regular bail in Naresh Kumar 2016.10.03 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh FIR No.229 dated 09.06.2015, under Sections 498-A, 304-B and 328 read

CRM-M-3199-2016 and -2CRM-M-7756-2016 with Section 34 IPC, registered at Police Station Meham, District Rohtak. Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that petitioners are parents-in-law of deceased-Monika. Moreover, very general and vague allegations have been levelled against them in the FIR as the same are not specific.

Learned State counsel, on instructions from investigating officer, has informed that out of total 24 witnesses, 20 have been examined so far, which inclucdes the material witnesses. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and with their able assistance gone through the material available on record. The petitioners were arrested on 12.06.2015. Since then, they are in judicial custody and no useful purpose would be served to further detain them in jail. The final conclusion of trial will take a long time. In view of above facts, the present petitions are allowed. The petitioners are ordered to be released on regular bail on their furnishing adequate bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned trial Judge/Duty Magistrate, Rohtak.

Needless to mention that, nothing observed here-in-above, would reflect, on merits in the trial of the main case, in any manner. September 28, 2016 ( RITU BAHRI ) naresh.k JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No Naresh Kumar 2016.10.03 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh