High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/32372/2020allowed

Balwinder Singh @Pata @Yogi v. State Of Haryana

2020-10-15Mr. Justice Gurvinder Singh Gill2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-32372-2020 Date of decision:15.10.2020 BALWINDER SINGH @PATA @YOGI .....Petitioner

Versus

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

Present:

Mr. B.S. Saroha, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Bhupender Singh, DAG, Haryana.

(Proceedings conducted through video conferencing). **** GURVINDER SINGH GILL , J. (ORAL)

1. The petitioner seeks grant of regular bail in a case registered against him vide FIR No.352 dated 6.9.2019 under Sections 323, 341, 379-B & 506 IPC at Police Station Ladwa, District Kurukshetra.

2. The FIR was lodged at the instance of Naresh Kumar wherein he stated that he is working as a 'Munshi' with Nayab Singh and that on 6.9.2019 when he was going on his motorcycle after taking an amount of `36,000/- from the Accountant of his office so as to give the said amount to driver of the vehicle and labourers, then the petitioner Balwinder Singh @ Pata @ Yogi along with Rahul stopped his motorcycle and gave beatings to him and snatched the amount of `36,000/- and also his motorcycle.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he has falsely been PANKAJ KAKKAR 2020.10.15 18:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

( 2 ) CRM-M-32372-2020 implicated in the present case and that there is no credible evidence to connect him with the alleged occurrence.

4. Opposing the petition, the learned State counsel has submitted that since the petitioner is specifically named in the FIR, no case for grant of bail is made out. Learned State counsel upon instructions from SI Vijay Kumar has however informed that the petitioner has been behind bars since last about 1 year and that he is not named in any other case.

5. I have considered rival submissions addressed before this Court.

6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and while noticing that the petitioner has been behind bars since last 1 year and he is not stated to be involved in any other case, further detention of the petitioner will not serve any useful purpose as conclusion of trial is likely to take some time. The petition, as such, is accepted and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned.

( GURVINDER SINGH GILL) 15.10.2020 JUDGE Gaurav Sorot Whether reasoned / speaking?

Yes / No Whether reportable?

Yes / No PANKAJ KAKKAR 2020.10.15 18:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document