High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/32189/2022allowed

Arjun v. State Of Haryana

2022-08-09Mr. Justice Harnaresh Singh Gill2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-32189-2022 (O&M) Date of Decision: 09.08.2022 ARJUN ... Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL

Present:

Mr. Mukesh Yadav, Advocate for the petitioner.

**** HARNARESH SINGH GILL, J.(Oral) Through this petition, the petitioner seeks regular bail in case bearing FIR No.64 dated 23.03.2021, registered at Police Station Sector-6, Dharuhera, District Rewari, under Sections 379-A and 34 IPC. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that initially the petitioner was granted bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rewari vide order dated 13.12.2021; that it was on a solitary date i.e. 15.03.2022, the petitioner could not appear and moved application seeking exemption from his personal appearance but the same was declined by the learned trial Court, his bail/surety bonds were cancelled and warrants of arrest have been issued and that the petitioner was rearrested on 11.05.2022 and since then, he has been in custody. On the other hand, learned State counsel while opposing the AMAN JAIN 2022.08.09 18:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

CRM-M-32189-2022 (O&M) -2prayer for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, does not dispute the custody period of the petitioner. He, however, submits that the petitioner is a habitual offender, inasmuch as, there are two more cases registered and/or pending against him, though on bail in the said cases and that the Court below has duly considered the application moved by the petitioner seeking exemption from his personal appearance, before declining the same.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner has been in custody since 11.05.2022. The petitioner was initially granted the concession of bail by the trial Court. In other case registered and/or pending against the petitioner, he is on bail. Prosecution evidence is yet to conclude. In such circumstances, the trial of the case would take a long time to conclude. Therefore, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars. In view of the above and without commenting anything on the merits of the case, lest it should prejudice the case of either side, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned. The petitioner is further directed to appear before the trial Court regularly.

09.08.2022 (HARNARESH SINGH GILL) Aman Jain JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No AMAN JAIN 2022.08.09 18:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment