Parvesh Kumari v. State Of Haryana
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH 225-2 Date of decision: 07.07.2025 Parvesh Kumari
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE
Present :
Mr. Rahul Dahiya, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Parveen Aggarwal, Addl. A. G. Haryana.
Mr. Neeru Bansal, Advocate, for the complainant. ****
, J. (Oral) 1.
The petitioner is seeking regular bail under Section 483 BNSS in case FIR No.619 dated 04.09.2019, under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B and 506 IPC, registered at Police Station Gharaunda District Karnal.
2.
The allegations against the petitioner are that petitioner along with her co-accused took huge money from 400 different persons with assurance to provide them job in Indian Army at various positions on the civil side but subsequently the accused persons failed to fulfill their promise and also refused to return the money. 3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations are although grave, however, status of trial is that out of 65 witnesses, 40 have been examined and in the meanwhile, present petitioner has undergone more than 3 years of sentence and she is facing Magistrate trial wherein the sentence which could be awarded to her in the given
circumstances would not be of more than 7 years. However, she has undergone more than 3 years of sentence. Learned counsel further submits that since the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, continuous detention of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice, therefore, petitioner be released on regular bail.
3.
Notice of motion.
4.
Mr. Parveen Aggarwal, Addl. AG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. Learned State counsel has filed the custody certificate in the Court today, which is taken on record. As per custody certificate dated 04.07.2025, the petitioner is in custody for 03 years 06 months and 12 days.
5.
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6.
In view of the above submission of learned counsel for the parties and considering the undergone period and pace of trial, especially the fact that about 25 more witnesses are yet to be examined, trial is likely to take a long time to conclude and as such, the continuous detention of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court deems it a fit case to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner during the pendency of the trial. 7.
Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is hereby ordered to be released on regular bail on her furnishing requisite bail bonds, surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.
8.
However, it is made clear that in case the petitioner misuses the concession of bail, the State would be at liberty to seek cancellation of his bail.
( )
07.07.2025 anil Whether speaking/reasoned :
Yes / No Whether reportable :
Yes / No