Raj Kumar Yadav vs State Of Haryana
2023 Latest Caselaw 9215 P&H

SANDEEP GROVER
2023.07.03 16:00

CRM-M No.16900 of 2023 (O&M) 2023: PHHC:083000

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH

207
CRM-M No.16900 of 2023 (O&M)
DATE OF DECISION: 03"? JULY, 2023

Raj Kumar Yadav

.... Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana
.... Respondent

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJBIR SEHRAWAT

Present: Mr. Partap Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Arun Beniwal, Senior 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.433 dated 07.08.2021 registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC (later on Section 201 IPC and Section 66 of Information Technology Act, 2000 were added) at Police Station Kaithal City, District Kaithal, Haryana.

2. Custody certificate of the petitioner has been filed by learned State counsel today in the Court. The same is taken on record.

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the allegations against the petitioner are that he purchased the question paper of Haryana Police Recruitment (Male Constable). However, even the person who allegedly leaked and sold the question paper, as well as, the

person who allegedly disclosed the name of the petitioner in the case

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

SANDEEP GROVER

2023.07.03 16:00

CRM-M No.16900 of 2023 (O&M) 2023: PHHC:083000

have already been released on bail. The petitioner is in custody for the past 6 months and 18 days. There is no other case registered against the petitioner, however, after registration of the present case, another FIR has been registered against the petitioner in the State of Rajasthan. Challan has already been presented. The petitioner is not required for any investigation purposes. Therefore, the petitioner deserves to be released on bail pending trial.

4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel, on instructions, from Inspector Amit, submits that the petitioner is the main accused who purchased the question paper and further sold to several other persons. The petitioner is facing another criminal trial as well. Therefore, the petitioner does not deserve any concession of bail. However, it is not disputed by learned State counsel that co-accused of the petitioner, including one who leaked and sold the question paper, as well as, the person who allegedly disclosed the name of the petitioner have already been released on bail pending trial. It is also not disputed that the petitioner has been in custody for the past 6 months and 18 days.

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.

03"! JULY, 2023 (RAJBIR SEHRAWAT) 'sandeep' JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes No

Whether Reportable: Yes No

| attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. -2-