Shiv Kumar vs State Of Haryana
2022 Latest Caselaw 15349 P&H

CRM-M-34590-2022 (O&M)                                                   1

219
           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                       AT CHANDIGARH

                                          CRM-M-34590-2022 (O&M)
                                          Date of Decision: 30.11.2022

Shiv Kumar
                                                                 .. Petitioner
              Vs.

State of Haryana
                                                               ..Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ BAJAJ

Present:      Mr. U.K. Agnihotri, Advocate,
              Mr. Anshul Agnihotri, Advocate
              Mr. A.K. Agnihotri, Advocate
              Mr. Vikas Katol, Advocate
              for the petitioner.

              Mr. Sukhdeep Parmar, DAG, Haryana.
                              ...
Manoj Bajaj, J. (Oral)

Petitioner has prayed for grant of regular bail under Section 439

Cr.P.C, pending trial in case FIR No.689 dated 15.08.2018 registered under

Sections 193, 420, 467, 468, 471, 472, 506 and 120-B IPC at Police Station

Assandh, District Karnal. The petitioner is in custody since his arrest on

09.09.2021.

Brief facts of the prosecution case are that the present case was

registered on the complaint of the complainant Ramphal son of Shri Ram

Chander, resident of village Kurlan, P.S. Assandh, District Karnal. As per

the complainant, accused no.1 & 2 namely Shiv Kumar and Raj Kumar were

working with Postal Department Karnal as Postman and Postmaster in

village Kurlan and the accused No.3-Dilbag is real brother of accused no.1

and 2 and the accused no.4 Suman is wife of accused no.1. It is mentioned

that the accused no.3 has purchased various properties in his name from the

1 of 3

money which was embezzled from the amount of terms deposit and regular

(RD) deposit relating to the account holders. It is further mentioned in the

complaint that the accused no.3 has already transferred the ancestral

property in his name as the accused persons have already planned to grab

the public money. The accused no.1 & 2 have opened term deposit and

regular deposit accounts of the persons of locality within the jurisdiction of

village Kurlan and accused persons by manipulation of false and fabricated

documents had embezzled the amount of the persons, who had deposited in

their term deposit and regular deposit accounts. In this regard, the

complainant as well as other account holders had moved complaint against

the accused persons and postal department Karnal had also moved

complaint against the accused persons and on the basis of which, three FIRs

No.38 of 2012, no.485 of 2012 and no.192 of 2012 were lodged against the

accused. They were prosecuted and accused nos.1 to 3 were convicted by

the court in FIR No.485 of 2012 and in FIR no.38 of 2012. The court also

held accused no.1 and 2 guilty. It is alleged in the complaint that the

accused no.3 is the mastermind to get manipulated the forged and fabricated

documents in this conspiracy. The present complaint was sent by the Court

to the S.H.O. Police Station Assandh under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C for the

registration of the case against the accused persons. On these broad

allegations, the present FIR was registered.

Learned cousnel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner

and other co-accused faced trial in case FIR No.38 dated 08.01.2012,

wherein co-accused Dilbag was acquitted and the petitioner was convicted

vide judgment dated 21.12.2017. He submits that against the said judgment

of conviction, his appeal is pending before the Court of Sessions, wherein

2 of 3

his sentence has already been suspended. Learned counsel has argued that

as per the allegations in the FIR, certain documents produced in the

previous trial were forged, therefore, on the basis of the statement made by

complainant again the petitioner has been involved in the present case. He

submits that the investigation of the case is complete and the challan has

been presented on 09.04.2020, but the charges have not been framed so far,

therefore, the petitioner be released on regular bail.

Learned State counsel assisted by ASI Bahadur Singh does not

dispute the above fact and states that the co-accused of the petitioner have

been released on anticipatory bail. He, on instructions states that the challan

has been presented on 09.04.2020, but the charges are yet to be framed.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, considering

the fact that the co-accused of the petitioner have already been released on

anticipatory bail and also the fact that the offences are triable by Magistrate,

this Court is of the opinion that the further custody of the petitioner may not

be necessary for any useful purpose. Further, the charges are yet to be

framed and it may take considerable time to conclude the trial.

Resultantly, without meaning any expression of opinion on the

merits of the case, it is ordered that the petitioner be released on regular bail

subject to his furnishing requisite bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction

of the trial Court concerned.

The petition is allowed.

                                                         (MANOJ BAJAJ)
30.11.2022                                                  JUDGE
Jasmine Kaur



               Whether speaking/reasoned               Yes   No
               Whether reportable                      Yes   No



                                  3 of 3