Ravi v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-7617 of 2015 Date of Decision: 31.3.2015 Ravi .....Petitioner Vs.

State of Haryana .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK Present : Mr. Binjender Dhankhar, Advocate for the petitioner.

**** RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK J. (ORAL) CRM-10219 of 2015 Applicant seeks to place on record true translated copy of disclosure statement of the petitioner as Annexure P-2. Application is allowed, as prayed for.

Crl. Misc. application stands disposed of.

CRM-M-7617 of 2015 Petitioner seeks bail pending trial in FIR No. 499 dated 16.11.2014 now under Sections 304/34 IPC (initially registered under Sections 279/304-A IPC and Sections 304/34 IPC were added later on), registered at Police Station Kharkhoda, District Sonepat. Notice of motion.

On the asking of Court, Mr. M.K.Sangwan, DAG, Haryana, accepts notice.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that initially, the case was registered under Section 279/304-A IPC and the offences under Sections 304/34 IPC were added later on. Referring to the disclosure statement Annexure P-2 allegedly suffered by the petitioner, learned AMIT KUMAR 2015.04.01 10:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

CRM-M-7617 of 2015 counsel for the petitioner submits that no offence under Section 304 IPC is made out. He further submits that the disclosure statement was not followed by any recovery. Challan has been presented and charge has also been framed. The next date of hearing before the learned trial court for recording the prosecution evidence is 19.5.2015 and trial will take long time. He prays for allowing the petition.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Pawan Kumar, P.S. Kharkhoda, District Sonepat, submits that petitioner was found guilty for an offence punishable under Section 304 IPC. Charge has already been framed. He prays for dismissal of the petition.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after careful perusal of the record of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that keeping in view the fact situation of the case, petitioner deserves the concession of bail pending trial. It is so said, because it is undisputed on record that the alleged disclosure statement Annexure P-2, was not followed by any recovery. It is also a matter of record that initially the case was registered under Sections 279/304-A IPC and the offences under Sections 304/34 were added later on.

In view of the above, present petition is allowed. Petitioner is directed to be released on bail pending trial on his furnishing adequate bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, Sonepat.

Disposed of, accordingly.

(RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK) JUDGE 31.3.2015 Ak Sharma AMIT KUMAR 2015.04.01 10:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document