Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 9, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Sunil vs State Of Haryana on 20 May, 2021

Author: Anupinder Singh Grewal

Bench: Anupinder Singh Grewal

      In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh

201                                    CRM-M-17292-2021 (O & M)
                                       Date of Decision: May 20, 2021

SUNIL                                                      .....PETITIONER


                                   VERSUS


STATE OF HARYANA                                            ....RESPONDENT


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL

Present:    Mr.Parveen Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

            Ms. Aditi Girdhar, AAG, Haryana.

                        ****

ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL, J (ORAL)

Case taken up through video conferencing.

The petitioner is seeking regular bail in FIR No.517 dated 05.11.2020, under Sections 272, 328 IPC and Sections 61 (3) 4- 2020, 72-A of the Punjab Excise Act, 1914 (Haryana Amendment Bill, 2020) (Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC added later on), registered at Police Station Sadar Sonipat, District Sonipat.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that it is alleged that 06 bottles of spurious liquor were allegedly recovered from the petitioner. The petitioner is a vegetable hawker and is a poor person. He is in custody for over 06 months since his arrest on 05.11.2020.

Learned State counsel upon instructions from SI Om Parkash states that the challan has been filed but none of the prosecution witnesses has been examined as yet. She also contends that in view of serious allegation with regard to the selling of spurious liquor, the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of regular bail.


                                     1 of 2
                  ::: Downloaded on - 06-06-2021 08:35:07 :::
 CRM-M-17292-2021 (O & M)                                    -2-

             Heard.

In view of the above, especially when the petitioner is in custody for over 06 months, he is a poor person, Covid 19 pandemic and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I deem it a fit case to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner.

Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.




                                        (ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL)
                                                 JUDGE
May 20, 2021
A.Kaundal

      Whether speaking/ reasoned        :       Yes/No
      Whether Reportable                :       Yes/No




                                      2 of 2
                   ::: Downloaded on - 06-06-2021 08:35:08 :::