CRM M-40588 335 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT Rohit Singh @ Babbo State of Punjab CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Present : HARKESH MANUJA, Cr.P.C., prayer has been petitioner in case bearing FIR No. Sections registered at Police Station petitioner has been i the complainant and in pursuance thereof, sum of Rs.4500/ snatched from him. 2. petitioner is in custody for the last about 01 year and 0 is likely to take some time to conclude as March 2024 and even no prosecution witness thus he deserves the concession of bail. 3. petitioner submitting that the provisions of IPC and some under similar nature; pistol has been recovered from him; thus in view of his antecedents, does not deserve the concession of bail. 40588-2024 (O&M) [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM M Date of Decision: 15 Rohit Singh @ Babbo VERSUS State of Punjab CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Present : Mr.Vikas Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rohit Bansal, Sr. DAG, Punjab. **** HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) By way of present second , prayer has been made for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No. Sections 379-B (2), 34 IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959, registered at Police Station Sultanwind, District Amritsar, petitioner has been implicated on the allegations of pointing pistol at the complainant and in pursuance thereof, sum of Rs.4500/ ched from him. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody for the last about 01 year and 0 is likely to take some time to conclude as March 2024 and even no prosecution witness deserves the concession of bail. On the other hand, the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner has been opposed by learned State counsel submitting that the petitioner is involved in 07 more cases under other provisions of IPC and some under similar nature; pistol has been recovered from him; thus in view of his antecedents, does not deserve the concession of bail. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RM M-40588-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 15.01.2025 ...Petitioner ...Respondent HARKESH MANUJA Advocate for the petitioner. Rohit Bansal, Sr. DAG, Punjab. second petition filed under Section 439 made for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.47 dated 08.05.2023 under B (2), 34 IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959, Sultanwind, District Amritsar, whereby the on the allegations of pointing pistol at the complainant and in pursuance thereof, sum of Rs.4500/- was Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody for the last about 01 year and 06 months; trial is likely to take some time to conclude as the charges were framed in March 2024 and even no prosecution witness has been examined, deserves the concession of bail. he prayer made on behalf of the has been opposed by learned State counsel while petitioner is involved in 07 more cases under other provisions of IPC and some under similar nature; pistol has been recovered from him; thus in view of his antecedents, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of bail. 439 made for grant of regular bail to the under B (2), 34 IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959, whereby the on the allegations of pointing pistol at was Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the months; trial the charges were framed in has been examined, he prayer made on behalf of the while petitioner is involved in 07 more cases under other provisions of IPC and some under similar nature; pistol has been the petitioner SANJAY GUPTA 2025.01.16 10:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRM M-40588 4. through the paper book. I find substance in the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 5. concluded with the March 2024 and since then no examined. The petitioner is in custody for the last 01 year and 0 months and in such circumstances, c is likely to take some time, I do not find any incarceration of the petitioner 6. of the case, the present petition is allowed and the p ordered to be released on bail, subject to bonds/ surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate. 7. stand disposed of. 15.01.2025 sanjay 40588-2024 (O&M) [2] I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper book. I find substance in the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. In the present case, investigat concluded with the filing of challan, followed by framing of charges March 2024 and since then no prosecution witnesses has been examined. The petitioner is in custody for the last 01 year and 0 months and in such circumstances, c is likely to take some time, I do not find any incarceration of the petitioner. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the p ordered to be released on bail, subject to surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. .01.2025 ( Whether speaking/reasoned ? Whether Reportable ? I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper book. I find substance in the submissions made by In the present case, investigation already stands filing of challan, followed by framing of charges prosecution witnesses has been examined. The petitioner is in custody for the last 01 year and 0 months and in such circumstances, considering the fact that the trial is likely to take some time, I do not find any justification to extend the Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, subject to his furnishing adequate bail surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned ? Yes/No Yes/No I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper book. I find substance in the submissions made by ion already stands filing of challan, followed by framing of charges in prosecution witnesses has been examined. The petitioner is in custody for the last 01 year and 06 the fact that the trial justification to extend the Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits etitioner is furnishing adequate bail surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also SANJAY GUPTA 2025.01.16 10:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document