Pritam Singh Alias Pintu v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH 107+238 CRM-28626-2024 in/and CRM-M-31008-2024 Date of decision: July 29th, 2024 Pritam Singh alias Pintu .....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana .....Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present:

Mr. Sahil Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Gagandeep Singh Chhina, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana.

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL , J. (ORAL) CRM-28626-2024 Prayer in this application is for placing on record disclosure statement of co-accused Mahabir and petitioner as Annexures P-4 and P-5.

Application is allowed subject to just exceptions. Annexures P-4 and P-5 are taken on record.

CRM-M-31008-2024 Petitioner is seeking the concession of bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in case FIR No.650 dated 25.10.2023 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of the IPC registered at Police Station Civil Lines Hisar. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been in custody since 31.03.2024 in a magisterial trial. The only allegation levelled against the petitioner is of having identified co-accused as one Desh Raj before a Court of law when he stood as surety in a criminal case. It has been submitted that since the PUNEET SACHDEVA 2024.07.30 10:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M-31008-2024 -2investigation in the present case is complete, his further incarceration would serve no useful purpose as there can be no apprehension of the petitioner tampering with evidence, more so since the entire case of the prosecution rests on documentary evidence.

3.

Learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Sanjay, while opposing the prayer and submissions made by the counsel opposite, has reiterated the allegations levelled against the petitioner that he had in collusion with co-accused Ajay played a fraud upon the Court by identifying the co-accused as Desh Raj when he attempted to stand as a surety in a criminal case before a Court of law. 4.

On a pointed query, learned State counsel, on instructions, has submitted that the petitioner is not involved in any other criminal case; the stage of trial has also not been disputed by the learned State counsel, who submits that 11 witnesses have been cited by the prosecution, out of which two stand examined. 5.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material placed on record.

6.

The case at hand rests on documentary evidence. There is no likelihood of the trial concluding in the near future as nine prosecution witnesses still remain to be examined. 7.

In the facts and circumstances as enumerated hereinabove, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner be admitted to bail to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. However, it is made clear that anything observed hereinabove shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. July 29th, 2024 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Puneet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes Whether reportable :

No PUNEET SACHDEVA 2024.07.30 10:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh