Lalit Kumar v. State Of Punjab

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ......

Criminal Misc. No.M- 39551 of 2015 .....

Date of decision:30.11.2015 Lalit Kumar

...Petitioner

v.

State of Punjab

...Respondent

....

Coram:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh .....

Present:

Mr. J.S. Bedi, Senior Advocate with Mr. Harpreet Multani, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Simsi Dhir Malhotra, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.

.....

Inderjit Singh, J.

The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.42 dated 1.9.2015 registered for the offences under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC and Sections 4 and 5 of Prize Chit & Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act, 1978 at Police Station Sehna, District Barnala. Notice of motion to Advocate General, Punjab. On the asking of the Court, Ms. Simsi Dhir Malhotra, learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab has put in appearance and accepted notice on behalf of the respondent-State and contested this petition. Police record is also available.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as HARPAL SINGH PARMAR 2015.12.01 10:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Cr. Misc. No.M-39551 of 2015 [2] learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab appearing for the respondentState and have gone through the record. From the record, I find that first of all the offences are triable by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class. Secondly, the petitioner is not required for interrogation or investigation purposes as he is in judicial custody. The petitioner is in custody since 8.9.2015. The petitioner is not named in the FIR. No recovery has been effected from him. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that he was the employee of Partap Singh, who has already been granted bail by this Court. Therefore, on the basis of parity also, the present petitioner is entitled to bail. The trial of the case will take long time. No useful purpose will be served by keeping the petitioner in custody till the final disposal of the case.

Therefore, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case; without discussing the facts in minute detail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing personal bond in the sum of `50,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate.

November 30, 2015.

(Inderjit Singh) Judge *hsp* HARPAL SINGH PARMAR 2015.12.01 10:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh