Gurpreet Alias Billy v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-44646-2021 Date of Decision:-28.3.2022 GURPREET ALIAS BILLY ... Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA ... Respondent *****

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KARAMJIT SINGH ***** Present:- Mr. Vansh Malhotra, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Harpreet Kaur, AAG, Haryana.

***** KARAMJIT SINGH , J. (Oral) The petitioner has approached this Court seeking grant of regular bail in a case having FIR No.66 dated 12.3.2021 registered under Sections 307, 323, 506 IPC at Police Station Sadar Kaithal, District Kaithal. The counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. That as per the allegations in the FIR both the parties consumed liquor and thereafter altercation took place between them. It is further contended that the petitioner is in custody since 30.4.2021 and the complainant has already been examined in the trial Court GAURAV SOROT 2022.03.28 17:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

( 2 ) CRM-M-44646-2021 and it will take time for conclusion of trial. The counsel further submitted that thus no purpose will be served by keeping the petitioner in custody for indefinite period.

The prayer is opposed by the State counsel who submitted that there are specific allegations against the petitioner that he caused injuries, which were found to be dangerous to life of complainant-Pawan. I have considered the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner as well as by State counsel.

On the last date of hearing the present petition was adjourned with direction to the trial Court to make an endeavour to examine complainant/injured Pawan by the next date of hearing. Today the State counsel apprised the Court that the statement of complainant has been recorded by the trial Court. In all there are 14 PWs out of which only 2 PWs have been examined till date. It will take time for conclusion of the trial. Keeping in view facts and circumstances mentioned above, no fruitful purpose is going to be served even if the petitioner is kept in judicial custody for indefinite period. Thus without commenting on the merits of the case, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the CJM/Duty Magistrate concerned.

( KARAMJIT SINGH) 28.3.2022 JUDGE Gaurav Sorot Whether reasoned / speaking?

Yes / No Whether reportable?

Yes / No GAURAV SOROT 2022.03.28 17:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document