Raj Partap Singh v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-25698-2020 Decided on : 21.12.2020 Raj Partap Singh . . . Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Haryana . . . Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL (Through Video Conferencing) PRESENT: Mr. Rajesh Lamba, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

Mr. Arun Beniwal, DAG, Punjab assisted by ASI Vinod Kumar.

**** MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (Oral) The instant petition has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 16, dated 20.01.2019, under Sections 406, 410, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 506 IPC, registered at Police Station Bhondsi, District Gurugram, Haryana. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, who has been in custody since 06th July, 2020, has been falsely implicated in the case in hand. He further submits that as per the allegations levelled in the FIR the petitioner along with the co-accused has duped the complainant of a sum of Rs. 10,70,000/- on the pretext of advancing her interest free loan of Rs. 6,00,000/-.

It has been further stated that the FIR in question was registered on the basis of some misunderstanding, which has now been cleared and the matter has been compromised between the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the similarly situated accused has since been extended the concession of regular bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 07th December, JAWALA RAM 2020.12.

CRM-M-25698-2020 - 2 - 2020 (CRM No. M-40075 of 2020, titled as, "Govind Vs. State of Haryana"). In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed on record the photocopy of order dated 07th December, 2020, passed in CRM-M40075-2020 along with affidavit dated 21.10.2020 executed by the complainant in terms of the compromise arrived at between parties. Same are taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. Per contra, learned State counsel while opposing the prayer and submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions from ASI Vinod Kumar, has submitted that the challan has been filed in the instant case. However, he has not been able to controvert the factual submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Heard.

In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, I deem it a fit case for grant of the concession of regular bail to the petitioner, as the trial is unlikely to conclude in the near future, more so, in the prevailing conditions due to the outbreak of COVID-19. The petition as such is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail to the satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate. However, it is made clear that anything observed hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

(MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) JUDGE December 21, 2020 J.Ram Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No JAWALA RAM 2020.12.21 17:13 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh