High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/18335/2020allowed

Rajender v. State Of Haryana

2020-07-29Ms. Justice Jaishree Thakur2 pages

PANKAJ KUMAR 2020.07.29 13:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.18335 of 2020 (O&M) -1IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.18335 of 2020 (O&M) Date of Decision.29.07.2020 (Heard through VC) Rajender

...Petitioner

Vs State of Haryana

...Respondent

CORAM:HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR

Present:

Mr. Vijay Sangwan, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Dimple Jain, AAG, Haryana.

-.- JAISHREE THAKUR J. (ORAL) This is a petition that has been filed for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.138 dated 16.05.2019 under Sections 148, 149, 323, 326-A, 342, 354-B, 376, 379B, 452 IPC (Sections 395, 412, 201 of IPC added later on) and Section 25 of Arms Act, 1959 registered at Police Station Ateli, District Mahendergarh, Haryana.

Counsel for the petitioner herein would contend that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present FIR as there is delay of three years in lodging of the same. The petitioner is in custody since 14.06.2019. Challan has already been presented and the complainant has also been examined. Moreover, three co-accused have already been granted bail by this Court vide order 12.03.2020 passed in CRM-M No.9606 of 2020 and orders dated 18.06.2020 passed in CRM-M No.14034 of 2020 & CRM-M No.13995 of 2020, therefore, the petitioner is entitled to concession of bail.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-State opposes the

CRM-M No.18335 of 2020 (O&M) -2regular bail while contending that no ground is made out for granting concession of regular bail.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties. Keeping in view the fact that the challan has already been presented and three co-accused have already been granted bail by this Court, coupled with the fact that the trial is likely to take some time to conclude as due to COVID-19 situation, Courts are not working at their full strength and not taking up regular hearing matters, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the petitioner behind the bars. The instant petition is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on regular bail on execution of adequate personal/ surety bond to the satisfaction of concerned trial Court/Duty Magistrate. However, any observation made herein shall not be construed to be an expression on merits of the case. (JAISHREE THAKUR) JUDGE July 29, 2020 Pankaj* Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No