Punjab-Haryana High Court
Santosh Kesri vs State Of Haryana on 22 March, 2010
Criminal Misc. No. 20152 of 2009(O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc. No. 20512 of 2009(O&M)
Date of decision: 22.3.2010
Santosh Kesri ..............Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana ................Respondent
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARBANS LAL
Present: Mr. S.K.Garg, Narwana, Advocate, for the petitioner
Mrs. Neena Madan, Additional Advocate General, Haryana
HARBANS LAL,J.
This judgment shall dispose of Criminal Misc. No. M-20512 of 2009, Criminal Misc. No. M-20257 of 2009 and Criminal Misc. No. M- 29282 of 2009 moved by Santokh Kesri, Inder Pal and Arun Tewari alias Dabbu Tiwari respectively under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking their regular bail in case F.I.R. No. 437 dated 18.5.2009 under Sections 379/328/34 of the Indian Penal Code, Police Station City, Panipat.
The facts in brief are that a telephone call was received by Satyabhushan complainant on 16.5.2009. The caller of the telephone was I.N.T.employee and was staying in hotel West, Panipat. They wanted to purchase land measuring 4/5 acres. He told Satyabhushan to show the land. On 17.5.2009 Dharam Raj and Aman Malhotra went to hotel West in Innova bearing registration No. PB-CT-9431 and had shown the land at 2/3 places. He told them to come at 8.00 P.M. Aman Malhotra came back to Criminal Misc. No. 20152 of 2009(O&M) 2 hotel at 8.00 P.M. At 9.10 P.M. he made a call to Aman Malhotra and he told that they were staying in room No.103 and 105 of hotel Skylark. Their senior officer would reach by 11.00 P.M. and then deal will be finalized. Aman Malhotra did not come back throughout the night. In the next morning, on enquiry from hotel Skylark, it was revealed that Aman Malhotra was lying unconscious. He was got admitted in Ravindra Hospital, Panipat. The above mentioned vehicle was found missing from the Hotel Skylark. On 20.5.2009 when statement of Aman Malhotra was recorded, he told that after going to Skylark, two persons were found sitting in Room No.103 and they started taking drinks. After taking first drink, he had gone to bath room. When he returned, another peg was prepared by the persons present there after adding some intoxicating substance and after taking the same, he fell unconscious. In state of semi-consciousness, he overheard the conversation between all three persons and they were calling each other by the names of Inder Pal, Satosh Kesri and Arun Tewri.
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties, besides perusing the record with due care and circumspection.
The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted in one voice that a glance through the certified copy of statement of Aman Malhotra complainant would reveal that he had not identified the petitioners in the court. It is in his statement that "I have seen the accused present in court, but they are not same persons with whom I had a talk and showed them the land and shared the drink with them, nor I had any conversation between the accused persons." When he was declared hostile, no material favourable to the prosecution could be elicited from him. Further certified copy of the statement of Satyabhushan would reveal that he has also stated that " I have Criminal Misc. No. 20152 of 2009(O&M) 3 seen the accused present in court, but they are not the same persons who had called Aman Malhotra or ran away in Innova car." It is clear and unambiguous from these statements that they have resiled from their earlier statements. The learned State Counsel could not controvert these submissions in any manner. The petitioners Santosh Kesri, Inder Pal and Arun Tewari alias Dabbu Tewari are in custody since 24.5.2009, 23.7.2009 and 27.7.2009 respectively. Without meaning to an expression of opinion on merits of the case, I deem it appropriate to admit bail to these petitioners.
Bail to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Panipat.
Since the main petition has been decided, all pending Criminal Miscellaneous,if any, also stand disposed of.
(HARBANS LAL) JUDGE March 22 , 2010 RSK NOTE: Whether to be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes/No Criminal Misc. No. 20152 of 2009(O&M) 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. 29282 of 2009(O&M) Date of decision: 22.3.2010 Arun Tiwari alias Dabbu Tiwari ..............Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ................Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARBANS LAL Present: Mr. Sukhdeep Parmar, Advocate, for the petitioner Mrs. Neena Madan, Additional Advocate General, Haryana HARBANS LAL,J.
For orders see Criminal Misc. No. M-20512 of 2009 bearing capition Santosh Kesari Vs. State of Haryana decided today.
Since the main petition has been decided, all pending Criminal Miscellaneous,if any, also stand disposed of.
(HARBANS LAL) JUDGE March 22 , 2010 RSK NOTE: Whether to be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes/No Criminal Misc. No. 20152 of 2009(O&M) 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. 20257 of 2009(O&M) Date of decision: 22.3.2010 Inder Pal ..............Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ................Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARBANS LAL Present: Mr. Sukhdeep Parmar, Advocate, for the petitioner Mrs. Neena Madan, Additional Advocate General, Haryana HARBANS LAL,J.
For orders see Criminal Misc. No. M-20512 of 2009 bearing capition Santosh Kesari Vs. State of Haryana decided today.
Since the main petition has been decided, all pending Criminal Miscellaneous,if any, also stand disposed of.
(HARBANS LAL) JUDGE March 22 , 2010 RSK NOTE: Whether to be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes/No