Petitioner sought regular bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. Allegations were of theft and conspiracy. Court noted trial delay and lack of flight risk, granting bail without commenting on merits.
Grant of regular bail to the petitioner to the satisfaction of CJM/Duty Magistrate, Nuh.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Crl.M.No.M-12397 of 2010 (O&M)
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
Crl.M.No.M-12397 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: May 5, 2010
Veeru @ Bir Singh
.....Petitioner
v.
State of Haryana
......Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA
Present: Mr.Harinath Ram, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr.P.M.Anand, Addl.A.G., Haryana.
RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral)
The present petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.24, dated 28.10.2009, under Sections 379, 188, 120-B IPC and 13(1)D, P.C. Act, registered at Police Station S.V.B., Gurgaon, Sub Unit Mewat.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record carefully.
It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioneraccused that petitioner is nothing to do with the present case and, in fact, coaccused Rukka and Sehjad were apprehended on 29.10.2009 while transporting 300 tones of stones in a dumper bearing registration No.HR38p-3486 and that on the statements of co-accused, petitioner has been implicated. It is further contended that petitioner is not even the employee of the government and he is a private person. Further contended that in another similar matter, Hon'ble Supreme Court granted the anticipatory bail to the petitioner-accused.
Learned State counsel has not disputed these facts.
Trial is not likely to be concluded in near future. 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,
-2-
Crl.M.No.M-12397 of 2010 (O&M)
if released on bail.
Hence, in view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition filed by petitionerVeeru @ Bir Singh, for grant of regular bail is allowed.
Bail to the satisfaction of CJM/Duty Magistrate, Nuh.
5.5.2010
meenu
(Ram Chand Gupta) Judge
1 issue framed by the court
Whether regular bail should be granted to the petitioner accused in the present FIR.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Veeru @ Bir Singh
State of Haryana
RAM CHAND GUPTA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
