Punjab-Haryana High Court
Arjinder Singh @ Robin@ Chacha vs State Of Punjab on 8 January, 2021
Author: Hari Pal Verma
Bench: Hari Pal Verma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc. No.M-35931 of 2020
Date of Decision: 08.01.2021
Arjinder Singh @ Robin @ Chacha
...Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Punjab
...Respondent(s)
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARI PAL VERMA
Present:- Mr. Navkesh Singh Goraya, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Sidakmeet Singh Sandhu, AAG, Punjab.
*****
HARI PAL VERMA, J. (Oral)
Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.0225 dated 01.09.2020 under Sections 379-B, 34, 411 IPC and Section 25 Arms Act registered at Police Station Division No.6, District Ludhiana.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner was not named in the initial version of the FIR. It is only in the supplementary statement of the complainant Kuljit Singh that he had heard the petitioner talking with other co-accused Deepak Kumar @ Dabbu regarding deposit of an amount in the Indusind by him and that they have snatched Rs.2,80,000/- along with Aadhar Card with the connivance of 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 08-01-2021 23:27:12 ::: Criminal Misc. No. M-35931 of 2020 -2- other co-accused, the petitioner has been named in the present case. He further submits that the petitioner is in custody since 09.09.2020 and there is no other case pending against him.
Learned State counsel submits that it is in the supplementary statement of the complainant, the name of the petitioner has figured and recovery of Rs.30,000/- has been made from him.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties.
It is on the basis of supplementary statement suffered by the complainant Kuljit Singh, the petitioner has been arrayed as an accused in the present case. The question as to whether the complainant heard the petitioner talking with other co-accused Deepak Kumar @ Dabbu regarding deposit of an amount in the Indusind by him, is a matter to be established during trial. Considering the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 09.09.2020 and trial in the case will take sufficiently long time and no useful purpose will be served to keep the petitioner in custody, I deem it appropriate to release him on regular bail.
Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted on regular bail, subject to furnishing of his bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court.
January 08, 2021 ( HARI PAL VERMA )
AK JUDGE
Whether speaking / reasoned? Yes / No
Whether reportable? Yes / No
2 of 2
::: Downloaded on - 08-01-2021 23:27:12 :::