Lal Babu v. State Of Haryana

CRM-M-64547-2018 -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH.

Crl. Misc. No.M-64547 of 2018 (O&M) Date of Decision: October 17, 2019.

Lal Babu ..........PETITIONER(s).

VERSUS

State of Haryana ........RESPONDENT(s).

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA

Present:

Mr. A.P.S. Deol, Senior Advocate with Mr. Vishal Rattan Lamba, Advocate for the petitioner (s).

Mr. Munish Sharma, AAG Haryana.

******* SURINDER GUPTA, J.(Oral) The present petition has been filed under Section 439 Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 169 dated 25.08.2017 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, at Police Station New Colony, Gurugram, District Gurugram.

Heard.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the complainant, his wife and daughter-in-law in their statements before the Court have not stated anything against the petitioner. Learned State counsel submits that it is a case of blind murder and is based on circumstantial evidence. During investigation, police on coming to know of the mobile number of accused Sanjay, checked the same and it was found with the petitioner. The vehicle used in the crime was also SACHIN MEHTA 2019.10.19 15:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh

CRM-M-64547-2018 -2owned by the petitioner and the driver of that vehicle at the time of commission of crime is his employee. It has also come in evidence that petitioner was in contact with accused Sanjay on another mobile, which belonged to his father and the weapon of commission of offence was also supplied by him. The motive for occurrence is the money dispute with the deceased, who was also involved in recovering money from the vehicles carrying cattle, claiming himself to be a Gaurakshak. The prosecution will prove the involvement of the petitioner by producing entire circumstantial evidence on file. Keeping in view the gravity of offence, the grant of bail to the petitioner will allow him the opportunity to tamper with the prosecution evidence.

The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that wife, mother and father of deceased have not stated anything against the petitioner in their statements, carries no weight as this case is based on circumstantial evidence.

Keeping in view the gravity of offence, I find no reason to grant the regular bail to the petitioner at this stage. This petition has no merits. Dismissed.

However, learned trial Court is directed to expedite the disposal of the case.

( SURINDER GUPTA ) October 17, 2019 JUDGE Sachin M.

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No SACHIN MEHTA 2019.10.19 15:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh