Parveen Khurana vs State Of Haryana on 10 January, 2014

[Cites 5, Cited by 4]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Parveen Khurana vs State Of Haryana on 10 January, 2014

Bench: Ram Chand Gupta

                CRM No.M-43418 of 2013                                                            1




                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                                               CHANDIGARH


                                                         Crl. Misc. No. M- 43418 of 2013(O&M)
                                                             Date of Decision: January 10, 2014.

                Parveen Khurana
                                                                        ...... PETITIONER(s)

                                                         Versus

                State of Haryana
                                                                        ...... RESPONDENT (s)


                CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA


                Present:          Mr. R.D.Yadav, Advocate for
                                  Mr. Kartar Singh Malik-I,
                                  Advocate, for the petitioner.

                                  Mr. Raja Sharma, AAG, Haryana.
                                              *****


                RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral)

The present petition has been filed for regular bail under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure in FIR no.70 dated 28.01.2012, under Sections 420/467/468/471 IPC, registered at police station City Rohtak.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record including the impugned order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtak dismissing bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner.

It has been contended by learned counsel for petitioner-accused Singh Omkar 2014.01.14 11:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CRM No.M-43418 of 2013 2 that he has been continuing in custody since 15.09.2012 and that though investigation already completed and Challan filed and however, the case which is triable by Magistrate, is not likely to be decided in near future.

This factual position has not been disputed by learned counsel for respondent-State.

There are no allegations on behalf of the State that petitioner is likely to abscond or that he is likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts in the Court, if released on bail.

Hence, keeping in view these facts and without expressing any opinion on merits, the instant application for regular bail filed on behalf of Parveen Khurana is allowed.

Bail to the satisfaction of Trial/Duty Magistrate, Rohtak.

( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) January 10, 2014. JUDGE 'om' Singh Omkar 2014.01.14 11:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Punjab-Haryana High Court