Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
AVNEESH JHINGAN, J.
SANDEEP - PETITIONER
VERSUS
STATE OF HARYANA – RESPONDENT
CRM-M-24928-2021
DECIDED ON : 07-07-2021
Arms Act - Bail - The court granted bail to the petitioner under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in a case involving the recovery of a country-made pistol and cartridges, based on the absence of recovery from the petitioner, completion of investigation, and the grant of bail to the main accused.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought regular bail in a case involving the recovery of a country-made pistol and cartridges from the main accused, based on a disclosure statement nominating the petitioner as a supplier of weapons.
Finding of the Court:
The court granted bail to the petitioner, considering the absence of recovery from the petitioner, completion of investigation, the likelihood of trial taking time, and the grant of bail to the main accused.
Issues: The issues involved the petitioner's alleged involvement in supplying weapons, the completion of investigation, and the grant of bail to the main accused.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the absence of recovery from the petitioner, completion of investigation, and the grant of bail to the main accused, indicating that keeping the petitioner behind bars would not serve any useful purpose.
Final Decision: The court allowed the petition and granted bail to the petitioner, subject to furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned.
JUDGMENT :
AVNEESH JHINGAN, J.
1. The matter is taken up for hearing through video conference due to COVID-19 situation.
2. This is a petition under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for regular bail in FIR No. 100, dated 6th April, 2021, under Sections 25/54 of Arms Act, 1959, registered at Police Station Agroha, District Hisar.
3. The facts in brief are that on 6th April, 2021 during routine patrolling on Adampur Road, Agroha, Surjit was checked. Upon his search, one country made pistol .315 bore was recovered from his right pocket, 38 cartridges of .32 bore were recovered from the left pocket of his jean and 29 cartridges of .315 bore were recovered from his bag. On his disclosure statement, petitioner was nominated stating to be a supplier of weapons.
4. Mr. Raman Chawla, Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was nominated on the disclosure statement of the co-accused. No recovery was made and he was not apprehended from the spot. He relies upon the fact that the main accused Surjit was granted bail by the Sessions Court vide order dated 6th May, 2021.
5. Learned State counsel opposed the prayer for grant of bail stating that the petitioner is involved in two more cases.
6. The name of the petitioner surfaced in the disclosure statement; investigation is complete; challan stands presented; in spite of his custody no recovery was made from him; conclusion of trial is likely to take time, the main accused was granted the bail, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars, the petitioner is granted bail. The bail would be subject to furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned.
The petition is allowed.
It is clarified that the observations made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
AI
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
