Gurpreet Singh v. State Of Haryanaa

In The High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh Date of Decision:- 19.09.2024 Gurpreet Singh ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL Present:- Mr. Gagandeep Singh Gill, Advocate with Mr. Amandeep Singh Sidhu, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Prabhdeep Singh Dhaliwal, AAG, Punjab.

***** FIR NO.

DATE POLICE STATION OFFENCES 235 07.10.2023 Sadar Panipat, District Panipat 420, 120-B IPC GURVINDER SINGH GILL , J . (Oral) 1.

The instant petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking grant of regular bail in respect of aforementioned FIR. 2.

The allegations, in nutshell, are that the petitioner in connivance with co-accused Manpreet Singh, Anil, Pragat Singh, Ram Lal, and Kala had cheated the complainant and deprived him of an amount of Rs.20

- 2 - lakhs on the pretext of selling a pedigree horse but the horse which was actually delivered to the complainant turned out to be a horse of a much lesser value of about Rs.1 lakh only.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case and had no role to play in the alleged cheating. It has been submitted that, in any case, investigation is complete and challan stands presented and that as such the petitioner deserves the concession of bail particularly when he has a clean record.

4.

Opposing the petition, learned State counsel submits that the petitioner is specifically named in the FIR and since he was part of entire conspiracy and was present at the time of transaction, his complicity is clearly evident. Learned State counsel has, however, informed that the petitioner has been behind bars since the last about 4 months and 27 days. It has further been submitted that the petitioner happens to be involved in three other cases. It has also been informed that while charges have been framed, but none out of cited 12 PWs has been examined.

5.

This Court has considered rival submissions addressed before this Court.

6.

Without commenting anything as regards the merits of the case, but having regard the nature of allegations and the fact that the trial has not even commenced till date and as many as 12 PWs have been

- 3 - cited, further detention of the petitioner would not serve any useful purpose as conclusion of trial is likely to consume time. 7.

The instant 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.

19.09.2024 ( GURVINDER SINGH GILL) mohan JUDGE Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No