Harsh v. State Of Haryana

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Date of decision: - 14.09.2021 Harsh ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana .....Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI Present:- Mr. Chanderhas Yadav, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Karan Garg, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. ( Through Video Conferencing ) **** HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI , J. (ORAL) CRM-29014-2021 Application is allowed, as prayed for.

CRR-968-2021 In the present revision petition, the challenge is to the order dated 01.09.2021, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jhajjar, by which the appeal of the petitioner against order dated 20.08.2021, passed by learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Jhajjar, was dismissed and the prayer of the petitioner for the grant of bail has been rejected.

Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the petitioner

-2has wrongly been involved in the present case and submit that keeping in view the age of the petitioner, he be enlarged on bail. Notice of motion.

Mr. Karan Garg, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana, who has joined the proceedings through video conference, keeping in view the service of advance copy of petition accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State.

Learned State counsel submits that not only the pistol used in the crime has been recovered from the petitioner, but there are four other cases involving use of fire arms registered against him. Learned State counsel further submits that even the complainant is yet to be examined, therefore, releasing the petitioner on bail will cause serious prejudice to the conduct of free and fair trial.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record with their able assistance. The allegations against the petitioner are such that if proved, even an adult person will think twice before acting in such a manner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to controvert that petitioner, apart from the allegations in the present FIR, is also accused in four other FIRs of using fire arm. This conduct clearly shows the mind-set of the petitioner.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances recorded herein before, releasing the petitioner on bail, is likely to put the life and liberty of the citizens in danger and even the smooth trial might not be possible as the material witnesses are yet to be examined.

-3In view of the above, no interference is called for in the impugned order dated 01.09.2021, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jhajjar.

Dismissed.

( HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI ) September 14, 2021 JUDGE naresh.k Whether reasoned/speaking?

Yes Whether reportable?

No