High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/48974/2021allowed

Gaurav Rana v. State Of Haryana

2022-05-23Mr. Justice Harnaresh Singh Gill2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-48974-2021 (O&M) Date of Decision: 23.05.2022 GAURAV RANA

STATE OF HARYANA

! """"

Through this petition, the petitioner seeks regular bail in case bearing FIR No.204 dated 09.05.2020, registered at Police Station Ambala Cantt., under Sections 34, 323, 325, 341, 365, 387, 364-A and 506 IPC.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that three material witnesses i.e. complainant-Satyam, his brother-Shivam and father-Anil Sood, while appearing in the witness-box as PW-2 to PW-4, respectively, have not supported the prosecution version and turned hostile and that the petitioner has been in custody since 10.05.2020. He further submits that the co-accused have already been granted the concession of bail.

Per contra, while opposing the prayer for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, learned State counsel does not dispute the custody period of the petitioner. He, however, submits that the petitioner is a AMAN JAIN 2022.05.23 18:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

CRM-M-48974-2021 (O&M) -2habitual offender, inasmuch as 7 more FIRs are registered and/or pending against him, out of which, the petitioner stands acquitted in three cases, convicted in one and remaining three are pending. He further submits that the petitioner has specifically been named in the FIR and recovery of one country made pistol with magazine, 6 live round of 32 bore and ransom amount of Rs.6,000/- was effected from him. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner has been in custody since 10.05.2020. Material prosecution witnesses including the complainant have turned hostile. Co-accused have already been enlarged on bail. Some of the prosecution witnesses are yet to be examined. In such circumstances, the trial of the case would take a long time to conclude.

Therefore, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars. In view of the above and without commenting anything on the merits of the case, lest it should prejudice the case of both the sides, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.

#$ Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No AMAN JAIN 2022.05.23 18:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment