Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 3]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Saurabh Kumar And Ors vs State Of Haryana on 10 December, 2020

Author: Anupinder Singh Grewal

Bench: Anupinder Singh Grewal

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

212                                 CRM-M-20455-2020
                                    DATE OF DECISION: 10.12.2020

SAURABH KUMAR AND ORS                                    ... Petitioner (s)

                             Versus

STATE OF HARYANA                                         ... Respondent(s)


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL

Present:        Mr. H.S. Deol, Advocate
                for the petitioners.

                Mr. Deepak Grewal, DAG, Haryana.

                      ****

ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL, J. (ORAL)

The petitioners are seeking regular bail in FIR No.660 dated 23.09.2019, under Section 379-A IPC and Sections 25/54/59 of the Arms Act, registered at Police Station Model Town, District Rewari.

Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners are not named in the FIR and have been arraigned as an accused in this case on the basis of their statement upon arrest in another case. The allegations in the instant case are that Rs.2000/- was snatched from the complainant on gun point. He also contends that no recovery has been effected from the petitioners. The petitioners are in their early twenties and are in custody for about a year.

Learned State counsel upon instructions from ASI Gobind contends that charges have been framed but no prosecution witness has been 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 10-12-2020 22:45:54 ::: CRM-M-20455-2020 2 examined. He further contends that the petitioners are involved in two other cases.

At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioners contends that after the arrest of the petitioners in FIR No.268 dated 25.08.2019, they were involved in two other cases on the basis of their statement in this case but no recovery has been effected from them.

Heard through video conferencing.

In view of the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners, especially when the petitioners are in custody for over a year, they are in their early twenties, no recovery has been effected from them, the COVID-19 pandemic and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I deem it a fit case to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioners.

Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioners are ordered to be released on regular bail on their furnishing requisite bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

(ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL) JUDGE 10.12.2020.

SwarnjitS
               Whether speaking/reasoned        :   Yes / No
               Whether reportable               :   Yes / No




                                           2 of 2
                    ::: Downloaded on - 10-12-2020 22:45:55 :::