Lakhwinder Singh @ Lakhwinder vs State Of Haryana
2023 Latest Caselaw 9597 P&H

PARVEEN KUMAR
2023.07.07 17:01

2023:PHHC:085509
-l-
CRM-M-16898-2023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH

CRM-M-16898-2023
Date of decision: 07.07.2023

LAKHWINDER SINGH @ LAKHWINDER
...Petitioner

Versus
STATE OF HARYANA
keene Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL

Present:- Mr. H.S.Saggu, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Rupinder Singh Jhand, Addl. A. G. Haryana.

HARNARESH SINGH GILL, J. (QRAL)

1. Through this petition, the petitioner seeks regular bail in case FIR No.381 dated 09.04.2022, registered at Police Station Shahabad, District Kurukshetra, under Sections 380 and 457 IPC (Sections 473, 461, 427, 201 and 120-B IPC added later on).

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case; that the petitioner has been in custody since 22.04.2022; that recovery has already been effected; that the complainant has been examined, but some prosecution witnesses are yet to be examined and that there is no other case registered or pending against the petitioner. It is further submitted that one of the accused is yet to be arrested and the remaining co-accused are in custody.

3. On the other hand, learned State counsel, while opposing the

grant of bail to the petitioner, submits that petitioner had actively

| attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

PARVEEN KUMAR 2023.07.07 17:01

2023:PHHC:085509 CRM-M-16898-2023 * participated in the crime; that the petitioner alongwith the co-accused had stolen ATM machine containing the amount of Rs.18,41,600/-, and that recovery of Rs.1,45,000/- had been effected from the petitioner. It is further submitted that the incidents of ATM burglary are increasing day-by-day.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

5. Though the recovery has been effected from the petitioner, yet the fact remains that he has been in custody since 22.04.2022 and there is no other case registered or pending against him. One of the accused is yet to be arrested and the remaining co-accused are in custody. Some of the prosecution witnesses are yet to be examined. As such, trial of the case would take time to conclude. Therefore, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars.

6. In view of the above, without commenting anything on the merits, lest it should prejudice the case of either side, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his

furnishing bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial

Court/Duty Magistrate.

07.07.2023 (HARNARESH SINGH GILL) parveen kumar JUDGE

Whether reasoned/speaking? Yes/No

Whether reportable? Yes/No

| attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment