← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/20322/2022dismissed

Arun@Aman v. State Of Haryana

2022-10-11Mr. Justice Harnaresh Singh Gill2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-20322-2022 (O&M) Date of Decision: 11.10.2022 ARUN @ AMAN

...Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL

Present:

Mr. Pankaj Bali, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Pawan Kumar Jhanda, AAG Haryana.

   

   **** HARNARESH SINGH GILL, J.(Oral) Through this petition, the petitioner seeks regular bail in case bearing FIR No.977 dated 30.11.2018 registered under Sections 120-B, 302, 201, 468 and 471 IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act, at Police Station Assandh, Karnal.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not been named in the FIR; that the petitioner has been indicted in the present case, on the basis of the disclosure statement of co-accused, Nitesh (petitioner's real brother) and apart from this, there is no corroborative evidence to implicate the petitioner in the present case and the petitioner has been in custody since 10.12.2018. Per contra, while opposing the prayer for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, learned State counsel and learned counsel for the AMAN JAIN 2022.10.20 12:36 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

CRM-M-20322-2022 (O&M) -2complainant submits that the complainant in his testimony before the trial Court recorded on 27.02.2020, specifically deposed that Nitish (brother of the petitioner) had told him that he along with the petitioner, Ankit and Rohit had committed the murder of Prince (nephew of the complainant) and dumped the body in the drain. They, however, do not dispute the custody period of the petitioner. They further submits that out of total 32 prosecution witnesses, 10 have already been examined. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. The complainant in his testimony has specifically named the petitioner as the one involved in the murder of his nephew, namely, Prince and thereafter, dumping the body in the drain. The allegations against the petitioner are serious and grave in nature. Merely because the petitioner has been in custody since 10.12.2018 does not entitle him for the concession of regular bail.

In view of the above, no case is made out to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner. Dismissed.

11.10.2022 (HARNARESH SINGH GILL) Aman Jain JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No AMAN JAIN 2022.10.20 12:36 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment