Kuldeep @ Gurdeep v. State Of Haryana

PANKAJ KUMAR 2021.07.30 17:27 I am the author of this document CRM-M No.35758 of 2020 (O&M) -1IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.35758 of 2020 (O&M) Date of Decision:28.07.2021 (Heard through VC) Kuldeep @ Gurdeep

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana

...Respondent

CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR Present:- Mr. Munish Kumar Garg, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Bhupender Singh, DAG, Haryana.

**** JAISHREE THAKUR, J.

(ORAL) Counsel for the petitioner prays for grant of regular bail to the petitioner by contending that statements of the material witnesses have been recorded and only three witnesses remain to be examined, who are official witnesses. There is no likelihood of influencing the material witness by the petitioner and therefore, his custodial interrogation is no longer required. Counsel for the respondent-State opposes grant of bail to the petitioner herein by contending that he is in custody for alleged commission of offence under Section 4 of the POCSO Act among others. It is argued that trial is likely to be concluded soon as only three official witnesses remain to be examined.

I have heard counsel for the parties. Taking in view the fact that only three witnesses remain to be examined, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and deem it appropriate to direct the trial court to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of

CRM-M No.35758 of 2020 (O&M) -2six months.

The instant petition stands disposed of with above observations.

(JAISHREE THAKUR) July 28, 2021 JUDGE Pankaj* Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No