Punjab-Haryana High Court
Mukesh Kumar @ Maggi vs State Of Punjab on 23 December, 2021
Author: Alka Sarin
Bench: Alka Sarin
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 211A CRM-M No.29151 of 2021 Date of Decision: 23.12.2021 Mukesh Kumar @ Maggi ....Petitioner VERSUS State of Punjab ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN Present: Mr. Fatehjeet Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms.Anju Sharma Kaushik, DAG Punjab 3 3 of 26 2k 3K ok ALKA SARIN, J. (Oral)
Heard in physical mode.
The present petition has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No.121 dated 21.06.2020 under Sections 307, 323, 324, 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Section 326 IPC was added later on) registered at Police Station Bhargo Camp, Police Commissionerate Jalandhar.
Vide order dated 25.10.2021 the present case was ordered to be listed with CRM-M-1993 of 2021 i.e. the bail petition filed by co-accused, namely, Jaspal @ Yashpal @ Lovely.
Status report by way of affidavit of Waryam Singh, PPS, Assistant Commissioner of Police, (West), Jalandhar filed by learned State counsel is taken on record.
JITENDER KUMAR 2021.12.24 08:24 | attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CHANDIGARH JITENDER KUMAR 2021.12.24 08:24 CRM-M No.29151 of 2021 -2- Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 21.06.2020 and the challan was presented on 17.09.2020 and that the trial was not progressing inasmuch as per status report filed by the State by way of affidavit of Waryam Singh, PPS, Assistant Commissioner of Police (West), Jalandhar, the charges are yet to be framed and the prosecution evidence is yet to commence. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further contend that no specific role has been attributed to any of the accused in the FIR, though a Kirpan is alleged to have been got recovered on the basis of disclosure statement of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that all the injuries on the person of Rohit Kumar were found to be simple and blunt in nature. Only injury no.1 on the person of Gaurav Sharma was found to be dangerous to life and injury nos.4, 5 and 6 were declared grievous in nature and injury nos.2, 3 and 8 were declared simple in nature.
Learned State counsel is not in a position to deny the factual averments as stated by learned counsel for the petitioner. Heard.
In the present case as per FIR, no specific role has been attributed to any of the accused. However, kirpan is stated to have been got recovered on the basis of disclosure statement of the petitioner. The petitioner has been in custody since 21.06.2020.
Without commenting upon the merits of the case, keeping in view the above facts and considering the long period of custody of the petitioner as well as the fact that the trial is not progressing inasmuch as | attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.29151 of 2021 -3- charges are yet to be framed, I deem it fit to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner. The petitioner is directed to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Illagqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate/Trial Court concerned.
However, the Prosecution will always be at liberty to apply for cancellation of bail in case the petitioner is found to be misusing the concession of bail in any manner.
It is also made clear that any observation made herein shall not be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
Disposed off.
( ALKA SARIN ) JUDGE 23"! December, 2021 jk NOTE: Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking Whether reportable: YES/NO JITENDER KUMAR 2021.12.24 08:24 | attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CHANDIGARH