Vicky @ Ladoo v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-3811-2016 (O&M).

Decided on: April 21, 2016.

Vicky @ Ladoo ..... Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Haryana ..... Respondent(s) ***

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI PRESENT Mr.P.S.Sekhon, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr.G.S.Salwara, DAG, Haryana.

M.M.S. BEDI, J (ORAL).

State counsel, on the instructions of ASI Kuldeep Singh, informs that the petitioner has been involved in three other cases which were registered by name against the petitioner prior to the date of present FIR, the details of which are as under: - i) FIR No.42 of 22.2.2009, under Section 392/34 IPC, registered at P.S. Lakhan Majra;

ii) FIR No.73 of 2009, under Section 457 and 380 IPC, registered at P.S. Sadar, Hisar; and iii) FIR No.4 of 2009, under Section 457 and 380 IPC, registered at P.S. Tosham, Bhiwani.

The petitioner had been arrested on 1.8.2015 pursuant to a secret information received by the police that the petitioner along with one Pawan and 5-6 others person has been indulging in fake currency notes and were planning to rob a petrol pump in an isolated place wearing police uniform. The petitioner was allegedly arrested along with others with pistols and uniforms whereas three persons allegedly escaped from the spot. So far as the petitioner is concerned, he was arrested from the spot along with country made pistol. The petitioner is an accused in three other cases.

On asking of the Court, State counsel, on the instructions of ASI Kuldeep Singh informs that in FIR No.42 of 2009 registered under Section 392/34 IPC at P.S. Lakhan Majra, the petitioner is already on bail.

The recovery has already been effected. The FIR appears to be general but the allegation against the petitioner is that he was planning to commit robbery along with his other co-accused. The petitioner having been in custody w.e.f. 1.8.2015, can be granted the concession of bail. It will be pre-mature to express any opinion whether the petitioner is involved in the case on account of he having been an accused in FIR No.42 of 2009 regarding robbery or he is a habitual offender.

Without expression of any opinion on merits of the

case, the petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court subject to the conditions that he will not indulge in any similar activity of which he is accused of. In case of violation of the same, it will be open to the prosecution agency to seek cancellation of bail.

(M.M.S. BEDI) April 21, 2016.

JUDGE rka