Rohit vs State Of Haryana
2024 Latest Caselaw 1768 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Rohit vs State Of Haryana on 25 January, 2024

Author: Sandeep Moudgil

Bench: Sandeep Moudgil

                                                            Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:010468




215                                                   2024:PHHC:010468

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                          AT CHANDIGARH

                                         CRM-M-67-2024
                                         DECIDED ON: 25.01.2024

ROHIT
                                                            .....PETITIONER

                                       VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA
                                                            .....RESPONDENT


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL

Present:     Mr. Lukesh Kumar, Advocate
             for the petitioner.

             Mr. Gurbir Singh Dhillon, AAG Haryana.

SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL)

1. The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked under Section 439

Cr.P.C., seeking regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No.147, dated 31.05.2023,

under Sections 147, 149, 323, 325, 379-B, 506 of IPC, 1860, registered at Police

Station Bass, Hansi.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that there are three injuries

mentioned in the MLR and none of these injuries are specifically attributed to the

petitioner and on that ground, prays for grant of regular bail.

3. Learned State counsel has filed the custody certificate of the petitioner,

which is taken on record. He prays for dismissal of the present petition stating that

he has suffered incarceration for a period of 7 months only, though is not involved

in other case. He also submits that as per the video clip made available, which was

prepared by one passer during the course of altercation, it is the petitioner, who is

seen giving the injury and all the injuries are attributed to him.

1 of 2

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:010468

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner controverts the submissions of

learned State counsel stating that as per the medico legal report dated 11.08.2023

(Annexure P-4), none of the injuries is declared grievous in nature rather are simple.

5. Heard, learned counsel for the parties.

6. Be that as it may, considering the fact that all the injuries attributed to

the petitioner are admittedly simple in nature, as is evident from the MLR dated

11.08.2023 (Annexure P-4) and the petitioner is in custody since 23.06.2023,

wherein charges were framed on 28.11.2023 and since then none of the witnesses

has been examined out of total 14, which shows that trial will certainly take long

time, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars

for an indefinite period, which would also violate the principle of right to speedy

trial and expeditious disposal under Article 21 of Constitution of India, as has been

time and again discussed by this Court, while relying upon the judgment of the

Apex Court passed in Dataram Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. 2018(2)

R.C.R. (Criminal) 131.

7. In view of the aforesaid discussions made hereinabove, the petitioner

is directed to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail and surety bonds to

the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned.

8. The present petition, is hereby allowed.

9. However, it is made clear that anything stated hereinabove shall not be

construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

                                                (SANDEEP MOUDGIL)
25.01.2024                                            JUDGE
Meenu



Whether speaking/reasoned       Yes/No
Whether reportable              Yes/No



                                                           Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:010468

                                       2 of 2