Hansraj Sharma v. State Of Haryana And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRM-M-42589-2022 Date of Decision: 14.02.2023 Hansraj Sharma .... Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and another .... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR VERMA Present: - Mr. Deepam Ragav, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Gaurav Bansal, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. Respondent No. 2-Ram Singh Lingwal-complainant is present in person.

ASHOK KUMAR VERMA, J. (ORAL) The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C., for grant of regular bail in case FIR No. 0238 dated 22.07.2022 registered under Sections 408 and 201 read with Section 34 IPC (added later on) at Police Station Sector-53, Gurugram. As per prosecution story, the aforesaid FIR was registered on the basis of complaint made by respondent No. 2-Ram Singh Lingwal alleging therein that he is working as a Director of Crysretial Trading Pvt. Ltd. The petitioner was employed as senior sales consultant in the complainant's company. He along with his co-accused had misappropriate goods worth Rs.12,69,229/- and sold the same. Two packets of artificial jewellery has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the instant case, on the basis RISHU KATARIA 2023.02.15 10:49 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

CRM-M-42589-2022 -2of false and concocted story of respondent No. 2. The recovery of jewellery articles, if any, had already been effected. Challan has already been presented and charges have also been framed by the trial Court. There are total 8 prosecution witnesses and none of them have been examined, so far. Petitioner is in custody since 07.08.2022. The trial is likely to take long time. No useful purpose will be served by further detention of the petitioner in custody. Thus, it is prayed that the petitioner may be released on regular bail.

On the other hand, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of regular bail to the petitioner. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, custody period of the petitioner and the fact that the trial is likely to take long time, but without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the considered view that the petitioner deserves the concession of regular bail.

Therefore, the petition is allowed and the petitioner-Hansraj Sharma, is ordered to be released on regular bail on furnishing of bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.

February 14, 2023 (ASHOK KUMAR VERMA) rishu JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No RISHU KATARIA 2023.02.15 10:49 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment