Gurjant Singh @ Mithu v. State Of Haryana

CRM No.M-43853 of 2014 [1]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM No.M- 43853 of 2014(O&M) Date of Decision: January 28, 2015.

Gurjant Singh @ Mithu ...... PETITIONER (s)

Versus

State of Haryana ...... RESPONDENT (s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE LISA GILL

Present:

Mr. Gopal Singh Nahel, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Pawan Girdhar, Addl.A.G., Haryana.

*****

1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2. To be referred to the reporters or not?

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest? ***** LISA GILL, J.

The petitioner prays for bail pending trial in FIR No.227 dated 11.06.2009, under Sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 506, 120-B IPC registered at Police Station Samalkha, District Panipat. It is contended that petitioner is not a beneficiary in the alleged transaction and neither has any role to play. The petitioner is not named in the FIR. He has been nominated on the basis of a disclosure statement of co-accused Bharpoor Singh wherein the present petitioner is also stated to be accompanying OMKAR SINGH 2015.01.28 16:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CRM No.M-43853 of 2014 [2] the other co-accused. He is in custody since 11.09.2014. There is no other case pending against the petitioner. It is contended that the role attributed to present petitioner - Gurjant Singh @ Mithu is similar to that of co-accused Balwant Singh, who has since been granted bail pending trial by this Court on 22.01.2015 in CRM No.M-41636 of 2014. Petitioner undertakes to appear on each and every date fixed before the trial court.

Learned counsel for the State has affirmed the factual position inasmuch as the petitioner is not a beneficiary in transaction. No recovery whatsoever is effected from him. No other role is attributed to him except that he was accompanying the other co-accused on the Teshil premises at Karnal. Out of 37 prosecution witnesses, two have been examined. There is no other case against the petitioner.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the controversy, it is considered just and expedient to allow this petition.

Consequently, the petitioner shall be released on bail pending trial subject to his furnishing requisite bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.

( LISA GILL ) January 28, 2015.

JUDGE 'om'

OMKAR SINGH 2015.01.28 16:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh