Harmandeep Singh v. State Of Punjab
!"# $% "&& '() *+ , -."/"
!"#
$ % &
'$!"&"! () **** 0/ +,
'$$
&
-.
//
'
'
&) & 012 - -!
-. 34
1/!563
1/ &
4! '
&
/ # & !
&
/
!"
3" 8 4 " $
! $ $
& '# $ $$ 9 ' : 2 ;- )
!$ " )&
$
&! &
7
9 $ '$ ' $
! $
9
$
) & $ $
$ $ )< 9 ' "
# ) ' 2 =5, & 9 $
$$ ' ) $ ' > $$ && ' ! 01$) '
3.
Learned counsel for petitioner argued that petitioner is falsely implicated in this case. Co-accused Sandeep Dhawan @ Golu is granted Sunil Devi 2024.12.16 10:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
concession of regular bail vide order dated 06.02.2024 (Annexure P-2). Challan is already presented but chargesheet is yet to be framed. Petitioner is behind the bars for the last about one year. He will abide by the terms of bail order. Therefore, his regular bail petition may be allowed. 4.
Bail petition is opposed by learned counsel representing State. Status report has been filed confirming the fact that challan is presented on 11.03.2024. Co-accused Sandeep Dhawan @ Golu absented and his arrest warrants have been issued. Therefore, chargesheet is yet to be framed. There are specific allegations against the petitioner. Therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail.
6.
I have considered the arguments and have gone through the record carefully. Present petitioner was arrested on 12.12.2023 and he is behind the bars for the last one year. Co-accused Sandeep Dhawan @ Golu was granted bail vide order dated 06.02.2024. Now he has absented, therefore, proceedings before the trial Court could not proceed further. It cannot be ignored that present petitioner is in custody for the last one year. He cannot be kept behind the bars for indefinite time period.?$
! n the light of aforesaid factual position, without going on the merits of the case, '
& ) &
& )< + ,
'$ && , ) & ) &
$ ') &) & '
$ &
& $ & 9
$
& /
@ <A '
1 2 >$ $ 9 '@ B @2 >$ $ )& B @2 Sunil Devi 2024.12.16 10:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document