Punjab-Haryana High Court
Lalit Kumar @ Ghana vs State Of Haryana on 16 July, 2020
CRM-M-15504-2020 -1-
215
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
****
CRM-M-15504-2020
Date of Decision: 16.07.2020
****
Lalit Kumar @ Ghana
..... Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana
..... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDIP AHLUWALIA
Present: Mr. Ram Kumar Saini, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr. Vishal Malik, DAG, Haryana.
Mr. Robin Lohan, Advocate,
for the complainant.
SUDIP AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL)
This is a petition for regular bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner in case FIR No.56 dated 17.02.2020, under Sections 436, 427 and 506 of the IPC, registered at Police Station Azad Nagar, Hisar, District Hisar.
[2]. On 01.07.2020, Ld. State counsel had been directed to place on record the relevant material to support his contention that the petitioner had a criminal background. In response, the petitioner himself has placed a copy of the judgment passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Hisar, dated 19.02.2015, according to which, he was acquitted of the offence mentioned in the concerned FIR No.561, dated 27.07.2012 of Police Station Sadar, Hisar. Further, a copy of the order passed in bail Application No.253 on 20.07.2013, goes to show that the petitioner had been granted anticipatory bail in the same FIR, in which, he was subsequently acquitted.
1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 27-09-2020 03:11:28 ::: CRM-M-15504-2020 -2- [3]. The petitioner has remained in detention in the present case for more than 3 months since 13.04.2020. Investigation against him has since been completed and challan submitted.
[4]. Allegation against the petitioner was that he had set afire the house of the complainant, who otherwise is a Police Official, due to some previous grudge, as according to the complainant, the petitioner was suspecting his involvement behind the electricity theft cases drawn up against the petitioner.
[5]. It is submitted by Ld. Counsel for the complainant that the reason for such supposition is that his client had earlier been threatened by the petitioner prior to committing the offence. But, it is strange that such a vital fact of threat was not mentioned by a Police Official in the FIR lodged at his instance.
[6]. Be that as it may, considering that detention of the petitioner is no longer required in the interest of investigation and there is little likelihood of an expeditious completion of trial on account of the Covid-19 Pandemic these days. At this stage, he is permitted to be released on bail subject to the appropriate terms and conditions to the satisfaction of the Ld. Trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned.
[7]. Disposed off.
16.07.2020 (SUDIP AHLUWALIA)
Bhumika JUDGE
1. Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
2. Whether reportable: Yes/No
2 of 2
::: Downloaded on - 27-09-2020 03:11:28 :::