Punjab-Haryana High Court
Dr. Subhash Sethi vs State Of Haryana on 4 July, 2014
Author: Mehinder Singh Sullar
Bench: Mehinder Singh Sullar
CRM No.M-21052 of 2014 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM No.M-21052 of 2014
Date of Decision: - 04.07.2014
Dr. Subhash Sethi
.....Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana
.....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR
Present: Mr. Amol Rattan Sidhu, Senior Advocate,
with Mr. Amit Sharma, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Rajat Mor, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana
for the State.
****
MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR , J.(oral) Petitioner-Dr. Subhash Sethi son of Megh Raj Sethi, has preferred the instant petition for the grant of regular bail, in a case registered against him, vide FIR No.213 dated 07.06.2014, on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 120-B and 180 IPC and Sections 3, 4, 6, 23 and 25, Rule 9 of The Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the PNDT Act'), by the police of Police Station Model Town, District Rewari.
Kumar Naresh 2014.07.10 09:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM No.M-21052 of 2014 -2-
2. Notice of the petition was issued to the State.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, going through the record with their valuable help and after deep consideration of the entire matter, to my mind, the present petition for regular bail deserves to be accepted in this context.
4. Precisely, the prosecution claimed that, on 07.06.2014 the petitioner has determined the pregnancy of a decoy women, namely, Meena for his illegal gains. It is not a matter of dispute that, the competent authority has already filed a private complaint against the petitioner under Section 28 of the PNDT Act, with regard to the same very incident. In that eventuality, as to whether two criminal cases of the same occurrence are maintainable or not, inter alia, would be the moot point to be decided during the course of trial Court.
5. Be that as it may, the petitioner was arrested on 07.06.2014. Since then, he is in judicial custody and no useful purpose would be served to further detain him in jail. There is no history of his previous involvement in any other criminal case. All the offences alleged against the accused are triable by the Court of Magistrate. Even, since the prosecution has not yet submitted the final police report (challan) against the accused, so, the final conclusion of trial will naturally take a long time.
6. In the light of aforesaid reasons, taking into consideration the totality of facts and circumstances, emanating from the record, as discussed here-in-above and without commenting further anything on Kumar Naresh 2014.07.10 09:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM No.M-21052 of 2014 -3- merits, lest it may prejudice the case of either side during the course of trial, the instant petition for regular bail is hereby accepted. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his filing a specific affidavit that he will not indulge in such activities in future and on his furnishing adequate bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rewari.
July 04, 2014 (MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR)
naresh.k JUDGE
Kumar Naresh
2014.07.10 09:45
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Chandigarh