Ajay Alias Ajay Pal v. State Of Haryana





 


 
 
 










  










     

!

!"
#$
 %

&    
' ()
 *
  

   



 

!"





    

# 
$ "
#%&
!!'
()
****

 +
*

    
+
!$)
,
!$)
-


- 
   
% 

 


..


/

 /%-
0 -

12
3 4
 
5
6! 7%
8
% 

 




2.
 /   

 -



 95
1 0
 


1 0
6()8

!
 
  



&- 
$  
/"


 & 
 

 
 % 




 
 $
/ 

) 

/ 




%)
 :;
.

&)

 9
1 0
 &
%0 
.

- )
--0/ 

!
0 %
59



 $
 



'
3 

:;
.

&)
 
) %/
0 )


&%

- 
 
 < 




  
 



  

< --

&

(

/ " 
 " 
0  /


 %-

0 &
%



%

:

%  

  
0)


 

: $
= /  

( 
 
&  

'

" & 
(  -
--0/

    


 
 % 
(  -

 >

 %
 
1 0

% 
&  
  

 -

%- & -)
%

%&0 

 $% 

4
 /$
(  -
 -




:

&- 
 
 


 
/ 
0  
%
0)

&/ & 
&- )
& -)
/ <
-
( 
(
/ 
 
(
( 
%  

&

& 
 

'%
2

/
;-

/
 
3.

As per the status report, during investigation Ragi Bhaskar, Sandeep, Surender Sharma, Udar Singh and Parmod Mishra were found not to be involved in the occurrence. Co-accused Dhanender, Saurav and Ajay were found involved in the commission of offence. On completion of investigation, challan was presented against co-accused Dhanender and Saurav Juvenile whereas present petitioner was joined in the investigation on 05.02.2023 and supplementary challan was presented.
4.

Learned counsel for petitioner argued that petitioner is behind the bars since 05.02.2023. Allegations levelled against him are false. Learned counsel for petitioner has placed on record statement of witnesses recorded during trial i.e. Bijender Singh PW-1, Tej Yogender PW-2, Rajesh Kumari PW-3 (Annexure P-2) and statement of Vinod PW-5, Vishnu PW-6. The aforesaid witnesses did not support the prosecution case. It is argued that present petitioner is ready to face the trial and will abide by the terms of bail order. Therefore, his regular bail petition may be allowed.
5.

Learned counsel representing State opposed the bail petition. It is confirmed that during trial prosecution has already examined six witnesses and rest of the witnesses are yet to be examined. Regular bail application of present petitioner was declined by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad vide order dated 24.04.2024. There are serious 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. Petitioner is behind the bars for the last about 01 year 10 months. Learned counsel for petitioner has annexed the statements of material witnesses recorded during trial who did not support the prosecution case. However, the evidence led before the learned trial Court will be appreciated as a whole at the time of final adjudication of the case. In the light of aforesaid factual position, without going on the merits of the case,  /%-
0 -
  

- 
0)
    
+

!$)
,
!$)
-

--


(

  

0
 -  

0 -
%

/
0 -
0 

% )



  

 -
.

%?%)
@%/

  













,
 -

 





















 
 < /?   
= ?3  
  0- 
= ?3