Allowed

Rajinder Kumar v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC11 Sept 2024CRM-M/44063/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the petitioner's bail petition under Section 483 BNSS, noting he had been in custody for nearly four months, had no other cases pending, and the trial might take a long time. The court admitted him to bail on usual terms without commenting on merits.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner admitted to bail on furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate on usual terms and conditions.

Rajinder Kumar Vs State of Haryana — Bail and Remand | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

S. No.208

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

¶3

AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

¶5

CRM-M-44063 of 2024 Date of Decision:11.09.2024 Rajinder Kumar .....Pe00oner Vs. State of Haryana .....Respondent

¶6

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA

¶7

Present:Mr. S.P. Arora, Advocate for the pe��oner. ****

¶8

DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (Oral)

¶9

By way of present pe��on filed under Sec�on 483 of Bhara�ya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 (old Sec�on 439 Cr.P.C), pe��oner prays for his release on regular bail in case FIR No.0084 dated 29.03.2023 registered under Sec�ons 120-B and 420 IPC at Police Sta�on Civil Line Jind, District Jind.

¶10

It is contended by learned counsel that a4er dismissal of his an�cipatory bail by this Court by way of order dated 30.10.2023 (Annexure P.5), pe��oner had joined the inves�ga�on. He is now in custody for almost four months. The only allega�on against the pe��oner is that he had appraised the jewellery in respect of which the loan had been taken by the co-accused Ram Mehar to the extent of �2,90,388/-. He also submits that the case is triable by the Magistrate and the trial may take long �me to conclude.

¶11

No�ce of mo�on.

¶12

Mr. R.K.S. Brar, Addl. AG, Haryana, accepts no�ce on behalf of the respondent- State.

¶13

RENU 2024.09.11 17:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶14

CRM-M-44063 of 2024 -2-

¶15

Learned State Counsel could not refute the afore-said submissions to the effect that the pe��oner had appraised the jewellery for gran�ng loan amoun�ng to �2,90,388/- to co-accused Ram Mehar.

¶16

As per the custody cer�ficate placed on record, the pe��oner is in custody for the last 03 months and 29 days. He has no other case pending against him. The case is triable by the Magistrate and that the trial may take long �me to conclude.

¶17

Having regard to all the afore-said facts and circumstances, but without commen�ng anything on the merits of the case, the present pe��on is allowed. Pe��oner is admiAed to bail on his furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the sa�sfac�on of learned trial Court/ Duty Magistrate on usual terms and condi�ons.

¶18

September 11, 2024		( DEEPAK GUPTA )
renu		JUDGE
Whether Speaking/reasoned	Yes/No
Whether Reportable	Yes/No

¶19

RENU 2024.09.11 17:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

Rajinder Kumar v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajinder Kumar v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Rattan Narula Vs R.K.Sethi and Ors.

Deepak Nehra Vs Poonam

Sunita Sharma and Anr. Vs Nagar Council Sunam and Others

Jyoti Vs Sonu

Vinay Kumar Vs State of Haryana

Lakhvir Singh Vs Harpreet Singh Alias Nikka Singh