High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/32214/2018allowed

Vinod Kumar v. State Of Punjab

2018-08-06Mr. Justice Jasgurpreet Singh Puri2 pages

223 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-32214-2018 Date of decision: 06.08.2018 Vinod Kumar

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR

Present:

Mr. Sukhdeep Singh Bhinder, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Ms. Rajni Gupta, Sr. DAG, Punjab **** JAISHREE THAKUR, J. (ORAL) This is a petition that has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.151 dated 02.09.2013 under Section 304-B IPC, registered at Police Station Canal Colony, Bathinda, District Bathinda.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner would contend that the petitioner herein has been in custody since 02.09.2013. He further submits that the cross-examination of PW-1 itself would reveal that it was a simple marriage and the question of demand of dowry would not arise. It is also argued that all material witnesses have since been examined. Ms. Rajni Gupta, learned Sr. DAG, Punjab opposes the grant of bail alleging that there are serious allegations against the petitioner. Satyawan 2018.08.07 15:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh

CRM-M-32214-2018 -2I have heard learned counsel for the parties. In view of the fact that the petitioner has been in custody since 02.09.2013 and the material witnesses have since been examined, no useful purpose would be served by keeping him incarcerated any more. Without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, concerned subject to following terms:- (i) The petitioner shall comply with the conditions mentioned in Section 437(3) Cr.P.C.

(ii) In the event of his absence on any date of hearing, the benefit of bail allowed to the petitioner shall stand withdrawn. The trial Court shall be competent to cancel his bail bond and surety bond and proceed to procure his presence in accordance with law. In that eventuality the accused shall have to apply for bail afresh before the trial Court.

(iii) He shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the Court.

Petition stands allowed.

06.08.2018 (JAISHREE THAKUR) Satyawan JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes.

Whether reportable No.

Satyawan 2018.08.07 15:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh