Israr @ Chhota v. State Of Haryana

PANKAJ KUMAR 2020.08.04 13:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.18946 of 2020 (O&M) -1IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.18946 of 2020 (O&M) Date of Decision.04.08.2020 (Heard through VC) Israr @ Chhota

...Petitioner

Vs State of Haryana

...Respondent

CORAM:HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR

Present:

Mr. Rajiv Kumar Saini, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Harpreet Kaur, AAG, Haryana.

-.- JAISHREE THAKUR J. (ORAL) This is a petition that has been filed for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.311 dated 01.04.2018 registered under Sections 323, 307 IPC and Sections 25, 54, 59 of the Arms Act and Section 13 (1) of Haryana Govansh Sanrakshan and Gausamvardhan Act, 2015 and Section 11 of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 at Police Station Chandnibagh, District Panipat.

Counsel for the petitioner herein inter alia would contend that the petitioner has been named as an accused in the FIR only on the statement of co-accused namely Abbas and Wazid. Abbas has been granted bail by the Additional Sessions Judge, Panipat vide order dated 18.04.2020 whereas Wazid has been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 25.02.2020 passed in CRM-M No.7509 of 2020 and therefore, the petitioner prays for grant of bail in the same terms.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-State opposes the regular bail, however, she is not in a position to dispute that the petitioner

CRM-M No.18946 of 2020 (O&M) -2herein has been nominated as an accused only on the statements of coaccused, who have already been allowed bail. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. Keeping in view the fact that the challan has already been presented and the co-accused on whose statement the petitioner herein has been named in the FIR have already been allowed bail, 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 August 04, 2020 Pankaj* Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No