Pankaj Mehta v. State Of Haryana

 





 



IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH
 

 (O&M) Date of decision: 11.03.2022 Pankaj Mehta

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana

...Respondents

    
   


 

        



  

  ****   





 CRM-3828-2022 Application is allowed as prayed for. Annexure P-10 is taken on record.

Main case:

 etitioner has filed this third petition under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail in case FIR No. 348 dated 15.09.2020 registered under Sections 354, 506, 509, 511 IPC and Sections 12 and 18 (Section 10 added subsequently) of the POCSO, at Police Station Civil Lines Sonipat, District Sonipat.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case as the petitioner has not committed any such alleged offence; that the alleged occurrence took place in the month MANGAL SINGH 2022.03.11 18:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

 





 

of January-2017, but the FIR was registered on 15.09.2020 i.e. after a gap of 3 years and 9 months; that the charges have been framed; that the prosecutrix has been examined; and that the petitioner has been in custody since 16.09.2020.



  

  !

      "  "!      #

 " #! 

  

      

 

        

    

  "!      $%    $$ 

 " #!    #  "    &   $' () *(** +



          The petitioner has been in custody since 16.09.2020. The FIR was registered after a gap of more than 3 1⁄2 years. Some of the prosecution witnesses are yet to be examined. Therefore, the conclusion of the trial would take time. Hence, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars.

+     "    !!       !      ,                      "     " 

    "   

"          & -.





  



   

 /   -01

2-3 /   "1

2-3 MANGAL SINGH 2022.03.11 18:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document