Present: Mr. Rajbir Sehrawat Advocate Vs. State of Haryana and Others - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1121809
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided OnJan-10-2014
AppellantPresent: Mr. Rajbir Sehrawat Advocate
RespondentState of Haryana and Others
Excerpt:
crm-m-18796-2013 (o&m) 1 in the high court of punjab and haryana at chandigarh crm-m-18796-2013 (o&m) date of decision: january 10, 2014 angrej …petitioner versus state of haryana and others …respondents coram: hon’ble mr. justice naresh kumar sanghi present: mr. rajbir sehrawat, advocate, for the petitioner. mr. nitin kaushal, aag, haryana, for respondent no.1. mr. akshay jindal, advocate, for respondent nos. 2 to 5. naresh kumar sanghi, j.1. prayer in this petition is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, angrej, son of giani ram, resident of israna, police station, israna, district panipat, who has been booked for having committed the offences punishable under sections 328, 343, 347, 420 and 506, ipc, and section 25 of the arms act, in a case arising out of fir no.19, dated 3.2.2012, registered at police station, israna, district panipat.2. learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the kapoor prashant 2014.01.13 14:57 i attest to the accuracy of this order crm-m-18796-2013 (o&m) 2 allegations levelled against the petitioner are inherently improbable. the manner in which the allegations are levelled are against the human probabilities. the petitioner was arrested on 14.5.2012 and he was thoroughly grilled, but nothing material could be collected by the investigating agency against him. he further contends that after completion of the investigation, the charge-sheet (report under section 173, cr.p.c.) has already been submitted and the aggrieved persons as well as the complainant have already been examined. therefore, there would be no chance for the petitioner to win-over the material witnesses and, as such, his further incarceration is not required.3. learned counsel for the state on instructions from asi ram singh of police station, israna, very fairly concedes the period of incarceration suffered by the petitioner. he also concedes that the complainant and the aggrieved persons have already been examined as prosecution witnesses.4. learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 to 5 though opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner, but could not substantiate his submissions.5. i have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the material available on record.6. the petitioner has suffered incarceration for one year and approximately 7½ months. after completion of the investigation, the charge-sheet (report under section kapoor prashant 2014.01.13 14:57 i attest to the accuracy of this order crm-m-18796-2013 (o&m) 3 173, cr.p.c.) has already been presented more than one year and five months ago. in spite of various opportunities granted to the prosecution, it has not been able to complete its evidence.7. keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and the period of incarceration suffered by the petitioner, angrej, son of giani ram, resident of israna, police station, israna, district panipat, the present petition for grant of regular bail is allowed. he is ordered to be released on bail during pendency of the trial of the present case, subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the learned chief judicial magistrate/duty magistrate, panipat. (naresh kumar sanghi) january 10, 2014 judge pkapoor kapoor prashant 2014.01.13 14:57 i attest to the accuracy of this order
Judgment:

CRM-M-18796-2013 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-18796-2013 (O&M) Date of Decision: January 10, 2014 Angrej …Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI Present: Mr. Rajbir Sehrawat, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Nitin Kaushal, AAG, Haryana, for respondent No.1. Mr. Akshay Jindal, Advocate, for respondent Nos. 2 to 5. NARESH KUMAR SANGHI, J.

1. Prayer in this petition is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, Angrej, son of Giani Ram, resident of Israna, Police Station, Israna, District Panipat, who has been booked for having committed the offences punishable under Sections 328, 343, 347, 420 and 506, IPC, and Section 25 of the Arms Act, in a case arising out of FIR No.19, dated 3.2.2012, registered at Police Station, Israna, District Panipat.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the Kapoor Prashant 2014.01.13 14:57 I attest to the accuracy of this order CRM-M-18796-2013 (O&M) 2 allegations levelled against the petitioner are inherently improbable. The manner in which the allegations are levelled are against the human probabilities. The petitioner was arrested on 14.5.2012 and he was thoroughly grilled, but nothing material could be collected by the investigating agency against him. He further contends that after completion of the investigation, the charge-sheet (report under Section 173, Cr.P.C.) has already been submitted and the aggrieved persons as well as the complainant have already been examined. Therefore, there would be no chance for the petitioner to win-over the material witnesses and, as such, his further incarceration is not required.

3. Learned counsel for the State on instructions from ASI Ram Singh of Police Station, Israna, very fairly concedes the period of incarceration suffered by the petitioner. He also concedes that the complainant and the aggrieved persons have already been examined as prosecution witnesses.

4. Learned counsel for respondent Nos. 2 to 5 though opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner, but could not substantiate his submissions.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the material available on record.

6. The petitioner has suffered incarceration for one year and approximately 7½ months. After completion of the investigation, the charge-sheet (report under Section Kapoor Prashant 2014.01.13 14:57 I attest to the accuracy of this order CRM-M-18796-2013 (O&M) 3 173, Cr.P.C.) has already been presented more than one year and five months ago. In spite of various opportunities granted to the prosecution, it has not been able to complete its evidence.

7. Keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and the period of incarceration suffered by the petitioner, Angrej, son of Giani Ram, resident of Israna, Police Station, Israna, District Panipat, the present petition for grant of regular bail is allowed. He is ordered to be released on bail during pendency of the trial of the present case, subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, Panipat. (NARESH KUMAR SANGHI) January 10, 2014 JUDGE Pkapoor Kapoor Prashant 2014.01.13 14:57 I attest to the accuracy of this order