High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/36048/2019allowed

Sumit @ Dangi v. State Of Haryana

2020-03-04Mr. Justice Gurvinder Singh Gill2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-36048-2019 Date of decision:4.3.2020 SUMIT @ DANGI .....Petitioner

Versus

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

Present:

Mr. Amit Choudhary, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Ashok Singh Choudhary, Addl. A.G., Haryana assisted by ASI Dayaram.

**** GURVINDER SINGH GILL , J. (ORAL)

1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking grant of regular bail in a case registered against him vide FIR No.685 dated 6.12.2018 under Sections 186, 224, 225, 332, 34, 353, 379-A, 506 IPC at Police Station City Fatehabad, District Fatehabad.

2. The FIR in question was lodged at the instance of HC Rajesh Kumar wherein it has been alleged that on 6.12.2018 when he along with HGH Vipin Kumar was proceeding to arrest the petitioner who had been arrayed as an accused in FIR No.682 dated 5.12.2018 under Sections 323, 506, 452 IPC and FIR No.667 dated 30.11.2018 under Sections 323, 341, 365, 506, 511/34 IPC, the petitioner as well as three other boys and a lady attacked the complainant and gave fist and kick blows to him and also tore his uniform besides snatching an amount of `700/-. GAURAV SOROT 2020.03.05 18:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

( 2 ) CRM-M-36048-2019

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he has falsely been implicated in the present case and in any case since 'challan' already stands presented, his further detention is not required.

4. Opposing the petition, learned State counsel has submitted that the petitioner is habitual offender having been involved in 10 cases and that in these circumstances, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of bail. It has however been informed that the petitioner has been behind bars since last about 10 months and that charges are yet to be framed.

5. I have considered rival submissions addressed before this Court. Without commenting on merits of the case and while noticing that the petitioner has already suffered incarceration for 10 months and that the conclusion of trial is likely to take some time as charges have not been framed, further detention of the petitioner will not serve any useful purpose.

6. 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) 4.3.2020 JUDGE Gaurav Sorot Whether reasoned / speaking?

Yes / No Whether reportable?

Yes / No GAURAV SOROT 2020.03.05 18:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document