Punjab-Haryana High Court
Manjeet vs State Of Haryana on 30 June, 2021
Author: Manjari Nehru Kaul
Bench: Manjari Nehru Kaul
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
229
CRM-M-23423-2021
Decided on : 30.06.2021
Manjeet
. . . Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Haryana
. . . Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL
(Through Video Conferencing)
PRESENT: Mr. Rajnikant Upadhyay, Advocate
for the petitioner(s).
Ms. Vibha Tiwari, AAG, Haryana
assisted by Inspector Dinkar.
****
MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (Oral)
The instant petition has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 420, dated 04.11.2020, under Sections 363, 366 of IPC and Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2020 (added later on), registered at Police Station Badshahpur, Gurugram.
Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been nominated as an accused in the case in hand on the basis of a disclosure statement made by co-accused, Yogender, who stated that the petitioner had prepared a fake date of birth certificate of the prosecutrix and thereafter witnessed the marriage certificate of the prosecutrix and the co-accused. Learned counsel contends that the evidentiary value of such disclosure statement is of an extremely weak nature for which he deserves the concession of bail.
1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 01-07-2021 23:14:06 ::: CRM-M-23423-2021 -2- Per contra, learned State counsel while opposing the prayer and submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions from Inspector Dinkar, has apprised the Court that the petitioner's role in the crime in question came to light during the disclosure statement suffered by co-accused Yogender. She has submitted that the charges are likely to be framed on the next date of hearing.
Heard.
In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the fact that the petitioner has been in custody since 05.03.2021, I deem it a fit case for grant of the concession of regular bail to the petitioner, as the trial is unlikely to conclude in the near future, more so, in the prevailing conditions due to the outbreak of COVID-19. The petition as such is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail to the satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate. However, it is made clear that anything observed hereinabove shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
(MANJARI NEHRU KAUL)
JUDGE
June 30, 2021
J.Ram
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether Reportable: Yes/No
2 of 2
::: Downloaded on - 01-07-2021 23:14:07 :::