← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/4704/2017allowed

Trishul Yadav v. State Of Haryana

2017-03-17Mr. Justice Harinder Singh Sidhu2 pages

 CRM-M-4704-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-4704-2017 Date of Decision: 17.03.2017 Trishul Yadav ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

Present:

Mr. N.S.Shekhawat, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. B.S.Virk, DAG, Haryana.

INDERJIT SINGH, J.

Petitioner-Trishul Yadav has filed this petition under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.85 dated 08.02.2016, registered at Police Station Sector-10, Gurgaon, under Sections 306 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Notice of motion was issued. Learned State counsel appeared and contested the instant petition.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned State counsel and gone through the record. From the record, I find that as per the allegations in FIR, Rajiv Ranjan (since deceased) committed suicide by putting a rope around his neck. A suicide note was also found in which it is simply Parveen Kumar 2017.03.17 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

 CRM-M-4704-2017 written that Trishul Yadav, present petitioner and co-accused Ranjit Ram are reasons for this. It is also stated in the suicide note that he was working as Contractor in Ansal Company with both of them and they committed dishonesty with him and used to harass him also. Both of them are responsible for his death. However, nothing has been mentioned as to what dishonesty has been committed by them and as to how they harassed him.

Moreover, the petitioner has been in custody since 21.12.2016. He is not required for any investigation or interrogation purposes as he is in judicial custody. 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.

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 bonds in the sum of 50,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate.

17.03.2017   





      

   

  Parveen Kumar 2017.03.17 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document