Rinku v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No.M-9073 of 2017 Date of Decision: March 22, 2017 Rinku

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMOL RATTAN SINGH Present:- Mr. Gourav Verma, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Vikas Chopra, DAG, Haryana *** Amol Rattan Singh, J. (Oral) By this petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C., the petitioner seeks the concession of 'regular bail'.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 10.05.2016, with only 2 out of 22 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far.

He points to the documents annexed with the petition, which are not being commented upon in view of the fact that the trial is ongoing against the petitioner, however, keeping in view the entire circumstances and also keeping in view the fact that, upon query, the learned State counsel, on instructions, submits that the complainant and one of the injured have already been examined, with the trial still not anywhere near conclusion, I deem it appropriate to admit the petitioner on bail.

Consequently, this petition is allowed. The petitioner would be enlarged on bail, upon his furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

However, it is made clear that nothing observed will be taken to be a comment on the merits of the case, which would be gone into by the trial court after appraisal of the evidence led before it. March 22, 2017 (Amol Rattan Singh) vcgarg Judge Whether reasoned/speaking: Yes Whether reportable:

no