High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/45266/2021allowed

Arun v. State Of Haryana

2022-01-24Mr. Justice Karamjit Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-45266-2021 Date of Decision:-24.1.2022 ARUN ... Petitioner

Versus

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

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KARAMJIT SINGH ***** Present:- Ms. Alisha Soni, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Naveen Kumar Sheoran, DAG, Haryana.

***** KARAMJIT SINGH , J. (Oral) Case has been heard through video conferencing on account of COVID-19 Pandemic.

Prayer is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case having FIR No.329 dated 28.5.2021 registered under Section 379-A IPC read with Section 34 IPC at Police Station City Chandni Bagh District Panipat. The counsel for the petitioner inter alia contended that the petitioner was neither named in the FIR nor any incriminating article was recovered from his possession and that the petitioner was arrested on GAURAV SOROT 2022.01.24 14:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

( 2 ) CRM-M-45266-2021 29.6.2021 and is presently lodged in judicial custody and is not required by the police for any further investigation.

The bail application is contested by the State counsel, who submitted that the petitioner snatched mobile phone of the complainant on 27.5.2021 and later on, the same was recovered from the possession of his co-accused Pardeep.

The FIR in this case was registered against two young men, who came on motorcycle and snatched mobile phone of complainant Vikram Singh on 27.5.2021 and thereafter escaped from the spot. The petitioner was arrested on 29.6.2021. As per prosecution, the aforesaid snatched mobile was recovered from the possession of co-accused Pardeep, who was later on arrested in this case. On completion of investigation, challan has been presented against the petitioner and other accused. It will take time for conclusion of the trial. The recovery has already been effected in this case. In view of the above, no purpose is going to be served even if the petitioner is kept in judicial custody for any longer 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) 24.1.2022 JUDGE Gaurav Sorot Whether reasoned / speaking?

Yes / No Whether reportable?

Yes / No GAURAV SOROT 2022.01.24 14:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document