Jahul v. State Of Haryana

CRM No. M-31104-2020

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH (203) CRM No. M-31104-2020 Date of Decision : 02.11.2020 JAHUL ....Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA .....Respondent (through video conferencing) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI Present:- Mr. Farukh Abdullah, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Safia Gupta, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. *** Harsimran Singh Sethi, J. (Oral) The present petition has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 82 dated 27.02.2019, under Sections 379, 411, 467, 468, 471, 476, 420, 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Sector-5, Gurugram, District Gurugram. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the petitioner has falsely been implicated not only in the present case but also in three other cases on similar allegations.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that nothing has been recovered from the petitioner and he has already been granted bail by the Competent Court of Law in the other FIRs, which are pending against him on the similar allegations and, therefore, petitioner be also granted the benefit of regular bail in the present case. Learned State counsel submits that the petitioner is involved in more than one case and the tools for changing the chassis/engine number have been recovered from him and, therefore, keeping in view the past antecedents of the petitioner, as he is involved in three other cases on NARESH KUMAR 2020.11.

CRM No. M-31104-2020 similar allegations, the prayer of the petitioner for the grant of regular bail be declined.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record with their able assistance. Nothing has been shown to be recovered from the petitioner in respect of the present allegations except the tools, which are used for changing the chassis/engine number of the vehicles. The petitioner has already been granted the benefit of bail in all the other cases having similar allegations, which he is facing. That being so, once the challan has already been presented and the trial is likely to take some time to conclude, no useful purpose will be served in keeping the petitioner behind the bars and learned counsel for the petitioner has undertaken that the petitioner will maintain good conduct, while on bail, petitioner is entitled for the benefit of regular bail in this case.

The petitioner be released on regular bail in this case subject to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes that petitioner will not influence the trial in any manner as the challan has already been presented and in case of default of the above undertaking, the State will be at liberty to approach this Court for passing appropriate orders. However, it is made clear that anything observed herein shall not be construed to be an expression of any opinion on the merits of the case.

November 02, 2020 ( HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI ) kanchan/naresh.k JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking?

Yes/No Whether reportable?

Yes/No NARESH KUMAR 2020.11.02 19:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh