Bittu Alias Gurtej Singh v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Sr. No. 220 CRM-M-38412-2024(O&M) Date of Decision:14.01.2025 Bittu @ Gurtej Singh

...Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Haryana

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

Present:

None for the petitioner.

Mr. Vikas Bhardwaj, AAG, Haryana, SANJAY VASHISTH , J.(ORAL) The instant petition has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for grant of regular bail to the petitioner - Bittu @ Gurtej Singh, who has been booked for having committed the offence punishable under Sections 302, 449 IPC, in FIR No. 313 dated 06.09.2020, registered at Police Station City Mandi Dabwali, District Sirsa, during the pendency of trial.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that on the previous date of hearing, i.e. 23.10.2024, the following order was passed:- "It has been informed that as on date 15 out of cited 24 Pws have been examined and that the next date fixed before the trial Court is 19.11.2024.

The prosecution is directed to produce the remaining PWs before the trial Court on the next date of hearing. The trial Court shall endeavour to record the statements of the PWs as may be produced unless there are compelling reasons for adjourning the matter. In case, the matter is required to be adjourned, short dates be fixed so that the trial is not unnecessarily delayed.

List again on 14.1.2025."

DINESH KUMAR 2025.01.14 20:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document at the bottom of left side

CRM-M-38412-2024(O&M) 3.

Learned State counsel argues that the list of witnesses has been exhausted and the evidence of the prosecution has already been closed. Presently the proceedings are fixed for recording of the statements of the defence witnesses for 14.01.2025 i.e. today itself. 4.

Since the trial is at fag end, this Court does not find any special and strong reason to accept the prayer for bail of the petitioner, at this stage. 5.

Consequently, the present petition is dismissed. 6.

While parting with the order, it would be expected from the trial Court that the proceedings are finalised at the earliest without any unnecessary delay.

( SANJAY VASHISTH ) JUDGE 14.01.2025 dinesh Whether speaking/reasoned?

Yes/No Whether reportable?

Yes/No DINESH KUMAR 2025.01.14 20:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document at the bottom of left side