Punjab-Haryana High Court
Puneet Gupta vs State Of Haryana on 28 September, 2022
Author: Meenakshi I. Mehta
Bench: Meenakshi I. Mehta
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
222
CRM-M No.41867 of 2022
Date of Decision: 28.09.2022
Dr. Puneet Gupta
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA
Present:- Ms. Sharmila Sharma, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Amrik Narwal, DAG, Haryana
for the respondent-State.
MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA, J. (Oral)
The petitioner herein seeks the relief of regular bail in the criminal case arisen out of the FIR bearing No.321 dated 25.06.2022 registered at Police Station Pataudi, District Gurugram, under Sections 23, 29, 3(1), 4, 5(1)(a), 5(1)(2), (6) of the Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Regulation and Prevention of Misuse), Act, 1994 (for short 'the PNDT Act') and Sections 120-B & 420 IPC (wherein the offences under Sections 25 and 4(1) of the PNDT Act are stated to have been added later-on), with the allegations that he had conducted the ultrasound/sonography test on the decoy Anupam Kumari for the purpose of sex determination of her fetus.
2. Status-report on behalf of the respondent-State, by way of the affidavit of the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Pataudi, Gurugram, has been submitted in the Court today and the same is taken on the record.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 29-09-2022 11:24:06 ::: CRM-M No.41867 of 2022 -2- State counsel in the present petition and have also perused the file carefully.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is behind the bars since the date of his arrest, i.e 25.06.2022 and the Challan has already been presented in the Court and moreover, the petitioner is not involved in any other criminal case of the similar nature and in these circumstances, he deserves the relief as prayed for in the present petition.
5. Learned State counsel does not dispute the afore-referred factual position but opposes the prayer of the petitioner for grant of regular bail.
6. However, keeping in view the above-discussed facts and circumstances as well as the fact that the trial of the case is likely to take sufficient time to conclude and without commenting or expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the petitioner named Dr. Puneet Gupta is ordered to be released on regular bail subject to his furnishing the requisite personal and surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned.
7. The petition in hand stands allowed accordingly.
(MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA)
28.09.2022 JUDGE
neetu
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes
Whether Reportable: No
2 of 2
::: Downloaded on - 29-09-2022 11:24:06 :::