Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Jasjit Singh Bedi, J.
Prince - Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana - Respondent
CRM-M-64321 of 2023(O&M)
Decided On : 05-01-2024
Bail - Kidnapping and Extortion - The court granted bail to the petitioner based on the completion of investigation, delay in trial, and the compromise reached between the parties.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner was seeking regular bail in a case involving allegations of kidnapping, assault, confinement, and extortion. The FIR was registered based on the statement of the complainant.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner had been in custody for a significant period, the trial was unlikely to conclude soon, and a compromise had been reached between the parties. Therefore, the further incarceration of the petitioner was deemed unnecessary.
Issues: The issues involved the delay in trial, completion of investigation, criminal antecedents of the petitioner, and the compromise reached between the parties.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the completion of investigation, delay in trial, and the compromise reached between the parties, leading to the grant of bail to the petitioner.
Final Decision: The court allowed the petition and ordered the release of the petitioner on bail, subject to certain conditions including appearance before the police station and the deposit of a sum of money with the Trial Court.
JUDGMENT :
JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J.
The Prayer in this petition under Section 439 Cr.PC is for the grant of regular bail in case FIR No.0477 dated 22.12.2022 under Sections 323, 342, 379-B, 384, 506, 34 IPC registered at Police Station Beri, District Jhajjar.
2. The instant FIR came to be registered on the statement of Nitish son of Surender who stated that Prince (petitioner), Aman, Takdir and one unknown person kidnapped him, beat him up, confined him in a room of a house, snatched his phone and cash and attempted to extort money from him.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are baseless. The FIR had been registered after a delay of 2 days which completely falsifies the case of the prosecution. The petitioner was in custody since 21.07.2023, the investigation stood completed but none of the 13 prosecution witnesses had been examined so far and, therefore, the trial of the present case was not likely to be concluded anytime soon. As a compromise had been arrived at between the parties, he was entitled to the concession of bail.
4. The Counsel for the State on the other hand contends that allegations levelled against the petitioner and his co-accused are grave. He is an accused in 05 other cases. Therefore, his criminal antecedents did not entitle him to the concession of bail.
5. The Counsel for the Complainant contends that a compromise has been arrived at between the parties and that the complainant has no objection if the petitioner is granted the concession of bail.
6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
7. Admittedly, the petitioner is in custody since 21.07.2023. After the completion of investigation, none of the 13 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far. Therefore, the Trial of the present case is not likely to be concluded anytime soon. Further a compromise has been arrived at between the parties. In this situation the further incarceration of the petitioner is not required.
8. Thus without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner-Prince son of Sh. Bhagwan is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned CJM/Duty Magistrate, concerned.
9. The petitioner shall appear before the police station concerned on the first Monday of every month till the conclusion of the trial and inform in writing each time that he is not involved in any other crime other than the cases mentioned in this order.
10. In addition, the petitioner (or anyone on his behalf) shall prepare an FDR in the sum of Rs.50,000/- and deposit the same with the Trial Court. The same would be liable to be forfeited as per law in case of the absence of the petitioner from trial without sufficient cause.
11. The petition stands disposed of.
The completion of investigation, delay in trial, and the compromise reached between the parties can be considered as grounds for granting bail in certain cases.
The main legal point established is that the age, first-time offender status, and prolonged custody of the accused can be considered as grounds for granting regular bail, even without commenting on t....
The right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution of India can dilute the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, particularly in cases involving first-time offenders and prolonged custo....
The court granted bail due to prolonged custody and lack of specific allegations against the petitioner, emphasizing that unnecessary incarceration should be avoided.
The seriousness of the charge alone cannot be the ground to deny bail, especially when the trial is at an advanced stage and the accused has no criminal antecedents.
The court considered the nature of injuries, absence of weapons, and the petitioner's young age and first-time offender status in granting bail.
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
