Arjun Vats vs State Of Haryana on 20 February, 2024

Take notes as you read a judgment using our Virtual Legal Assistant and get email alerts whenever a new judgment matches your query (Query Alert Service). Try out our Premium Member services — Free for one month.

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Arjun Vats vs State Of Haryana on 20 February, 2024

Author: Manjari Nehru Kaul

Bench: Manjari Nehru Kaul

                                                     Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:023557




                                                            2024:PHHC:023557

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                    AT CHANDIGARH
254
                                                     CRM-M-7492-2024
                                             Date of decision: 20.02.2024

Arjun Vats                                                      .....Petitioner

                                  Versus

State of Haryana                                              .....Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present :    Mr. Gurdeepinder Singh Dhillon, Advocate and
             Mr. Jatin Bansal Kotshaimir, Advocate
             for the petitioner.

             Ms. Trishanjali Sharma, DAG, Haryana.

                                   ****

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL)

1. The petitioner is seeking the concession of bail under

Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. in case FIR No.159 dated 01.04.2022 under

Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 and 120-B of the IPC registered

at Police Station Sampla, District Rohtak.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that

the petitioner has been in custody since 15.08.2022 in a magisterial

trial. After the challan was presented on 07.11.2022 charges had not

been framed till date and hence, there was no likelihood of the trial

concluding in the near future. It has been further submitted that the

prime accused in the case in hand, Sandeep, is on interim bail and the

parties have been referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of

this Court for exploring the possibility of an amicable settlement.

Learned counsel has further submitted that since the case rests on

documentary evidence, his further incarceration would serve no useful

1 of 3
::: Downloaded on – 22-02-2024 01:45:06 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:023557

2024:PHHC:023557
CRM-M-7492-2024 -2-

purpose as there could be no possibility of the petitioner tampering with

evidence which is already with the investigating agency.

3. Per contra, learned State counsel while opposing the prayer

and submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, on

instructions, has not been able to dispute that the investigation in the

case in hand is complete as challan stands presented, however, she

submits that the next date fixed before the Trial Court is 10.04.2024

when charges are likely to be framed. It has also been submitted that the

petitioner prepared a General Power of Attorney (GPA) in his own

name from Ghaziabad and thereafter sold a factory to the complainant

on the basis of a fabricated GPA. She has also brought to the notice of

this Court that there were bank transactions between the complainant

and the petitioner which further substantiate his involvement in the

alleged crime.

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

material placed on record.

5. The petitioner has been in custody for almost 01 year and

06 months having been arrested on 15.08.2022 in a magisterial trial.

Likelihood of the trial concluding in the near future seems remote as

the charges are yet to be framed coupled with the fact that as many as

26 witnesses have been cited by the prosecution. In the facts and

circumstances as enumerated hereinabove, this Court deems it fit to

extend the concession of bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner

be admitted to bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the

satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. However, it

2 of 3
::: Downloaded on – 22-02-2024 01:45:07 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:023557

2024:PHHC:023557
CRM-M-7492-2024 -3-

is made clear that anything observed hereinabove shall not be construed

to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

7. Needless to add, in case the petitioner misuses the

concession of bail granted to him, the State would be at liberty to seek

cancellation of the same.



20.02.2024                                 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL)
Vinay                                             JUDGE
             Whether speaking/reasoned        :      Yes/No
             Whether reportable               :      Yes/No




                                                     Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:023557

                                 3 of 3
              ::: Downloaded on - 22-02-2024 01:45:07 :::
 

[ad_2]

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *