High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/54106/2021allowed

Roop Singh v. State Of Punjab

2022-08-29Mr. Justice Harnaresh Singh Gill2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-54106-2021 (O&M) Date of Decision: 29.08.2022 ROOP SINGH

...Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL

Present:

Mr. JS Dadwal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. IPS Sabharwal, DAG Punjab.

**** HARNARESH SINGH GILL, J.(Oral) CRM-14991-2022 Application is allowed, as prayed for.

Annexure P-3 is taken on record, subject to all just exception.

Registry is directed to tag the same at an appropriate place. CRM-M-54106-2021 Through this petition, the petitioner seeks regular bail in case bearing FIR No.213 dated 15.08.2020, registered under Sections 177, 199, 200, 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC, at Police Station Division No.5, District Ludhiana.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been involved in the present case, who has been in custody since 15.08.2020; that the petitioner had produced his aadhaar card and furnished bonds, while appearing as a witness before the Court below and that the petitioner is neither the beneficiary nor has any concern with AMAN JAIN 2022.08.29 17:49 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

CRM-M-54106-2021 (O&M) -2the alleged occurrence. He further submits that there is no other case registered and/or pending against the petitioner. 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 from the petitioner one fake aadhaar card and two jamabandies were recovered. He further submits that the petitioner had identified two persons, who have impersonated themselves as Satpal and Jagmohan and that the prosecution evidence is yet to conclude.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner has been in custody since 15.08.2020. As stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner was/is not the beneficiary. There is no other case registered and/or pending against the petitioner. Most 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 either side, 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. 29.08.2022 (HARNARESH SINGH GILL) Aman Jain JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No AMAN JAIN 2022.08.29 17:49 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment