Firoj Khan Alias Romi v. State Of Haryana

MAMTA 2024.05.24 16:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment

  

 contends that even, other criminal cases were also registered against him with similar allegations, however, the petitioner is on bail in those cases. 3.

On the other hand, learned State counsel has opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner is a habitual criminal and is involved in five other similar cases. He further contends that the petitioner may abscond from the process of law, in case, he is ordered to be released on bail by this Court. Thus, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of bail. 4.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

5.

In the present case, the petitioner was arrested on 03.01.2024 and is behind the bars for the last more than 04 months. All the offences in the present case are trialable by the Court of Maigstrate and it will not be possible for the trial Court to conclude the trial in near future. Still further, no doubt registration of other criminal cases is a relevant factor, which is always taken into consideration by this Court while granting the concession of bail to the accused; however, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, the petitioner has been able to make out a case for grant of bail and the pendency of other cases would not be a ground for rejection of the bail.

6.

In view of the above, without commenting any further on the merits, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate/CJM concerned. 24.05.2024 (N.S.SHEKHAWAT) M.Sikka JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No MAMTA 2024.05.24 16:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment