IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Gurvinder Singh Gill, J.
Rahul @ Romeo - Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana - Respondent
CRM-M No. 23911 of 2021
Decided On : 01-07-2021
Regular Bail - Implication in Criminal Case - The court granted regular bail to the petitioner based on the lack of serious injury to the complainant, the petitioner not being named in the FIR, and the petitioner's prolonged detention without serving any useful purpose.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought regular bail in a case involving charges under Sections 307/34 IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act. The case was registered based on an incident where the complainant, a salesman at a liquor vend, was fired upon by three young boys, resulting in a bullet hitting a beer box and touching his left leg.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner had been falsely implicated, as he was not named in the FIR and came to be nominated subsequently based on a disclosure statement. The court also noted that the injury to the complainant was not serious and that the petitioner had been in detention for about 8 months without serving any useful purpose.
Issues: Implication of the petitioner in the criminal case, seriousness of the injury to the complainant, and the petitioner's prolonged detention.
Ratio Decidendi: The lack of serious injury to the complainant, the petitioner not being named in the FIR, and the petitioner's prolonged detention without serving any useful purpose influenced the court's decision to grant regular bail.
Final Decision: The petition for regular bail was accepted, and the petitioner was ordered to be released on regular bail upon furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned.
JUDGMENT
Gurvinder Singh Gill, J. - The petitioner has filed this petition seeking grant of regular bail in a case registered against him vide FIR No.281 dated 31.10.2019, at Police Station Sadar, Narnaul, under Sections 307/34 IPC as well as Section 25 of the Arms Act.
2. The FIR in question was lodged at the instance of Mahender Yadav, wherein it is alleged that he is working as salesman in a liquor vend and that on 30.10.2020, three young boys came to the liquor vend and insisted upon for opening the gate and when the complainant refused to do so, they fired from a pistol upon the complainant and that one bullet hit the box of beer while touching his left leg.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he has falsely been implicated in the present case on the basis of disclosure statement stated to have been made by a co-accused.
4. Learned State counsel has opposed the petition while stating that since one mark of injury was found on the complainant's leg, the allegations are fully substantiated. It has, however, been informed that the petitioner has been behind bars since the last about 8 months and happens to be involved in 5 other cases.
5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case especially that the petitioner is not named in the FIR and came to be nominated subsequently on the basis of disclosure statement and while also noticing that it is not a case of any serious injury on the complainant and that the petitioner as on date is behind bars since the last about 8 months, his further detention will not serve any useful purpose as the conclusion of trial will take some time. The petition, as such, is accepted and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.