Anil @ Nilu vs State Of Haryana
2023 Latest Caselaw 13897 P&H

SANDEEP GROVER
2023.08.24 09:22

CRM-M No.31120 of 2023 (O&M) 2023: PHHC:110250

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH
215
CRM-M No.31120 of 2023 (O&M)
DATE OF DECISION: 23°¢ AUGUST, 2023
Anil @ Nilu
.... Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana

.... Respondent

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJBIR SEHRAWAT

Present: Ms. Shaveta Sanghi, Advocate and
Mr. Aditya Sanghi, Advocate,
for the petitioner.

Mr. Karan Sharma, DAG, Haryana.

3K OK Ok 2

RAJBIR SEHRAWAT, J. (Oral)

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C for grant of bail pending trial in case FIR No.526 dated 16.09.2021 registered under Sections 394, 397, 302, 34 IPC and Sections 25(1)(a), 25(1-B) (a & b), 27(1) of Arms Act, 1959 at Police Station Pundri, District Kaithal, Haryana.

2. Status report by way of affidavit of Lalit Kumar, HPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police (AEC), Kaithal, has been filed by learned State counsel today in the Court. The same is taken on record.

3. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the case against the petitioner is totally concocted and fabricated. The petitioner is not involved in the crime as alleged against him. Even, as per the story of

the prosecution, the petitioner is alleged to have fired upon the deceased.

| attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. -l-

CRM-M No.31120 of 2023 (O&M) 2023: PHHC:110250

However, the FSL report has not confirmed the fact of the weapon having been used in the offence. Moreover even the complainant, who happens to be the son of the deceased, has not supported the case of the prosecution. There is no other case against the petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since 08.11.2021. Therefore, the petitioner deserves to be released on bail pending trial.

4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel, being instructed by SI Mahipal, has submitted that the petitioner is the main accused who fired shot upon the deceased. Although, shot fired by the petitioner has missed, however, thereafter he had given the weapon to his co-accused, who fired upon the deceased and caused fatal injury. Therefore, the petitioner does not deserve any concession of bail. However, it is not disputed by learned State counsel that there is no other case against the petitioner; that the petitioner is in custody since 08.11.2021 and that the complainant has not supported the case of the prosecution.

5. In view the above, but without expressing any further opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail pending trial subject to his furnishing bail bonds/surety to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty

Magistrate, concerned.

23"? AUGUST, 2023 (RAJBIR SEHRAWAT) 'sandeep' JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes No

Whether Reportable: Yes No

SANDEEP GROVER

2023.08.24 09:22

| attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this order/judgment. -2-