High CourtsSingle Bench

Parveen Kumar vs State Of Haryana

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 5 February 2021 · Citation: (2021) 02 P&H CK 0049

HON’BLE JUDGES
Arvind Singh Sangwan, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 120B, 409, 420, 427, 467, 468, 471 · Prevention Of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 13, 19 · Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 — Section 66D
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Petition (M) No. 4578 Of 2021 (O&M)
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

15 paragraphs · 293 words

Arvind Singh Sangwan, J. (ORAL)

Prayer in this petition is for grant of regular bail in FIR No.207 dated 14.07.2020 under Sections 409, 420, 427, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, Section 13 of

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Section 66-D of Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008, registered at Police Station Sector 56,

District Gurugram.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per allegations in the FIR, registered on the complaint of one Dheeraj, it is stated that cheating is

committed by one Pawan, Lineman for tempering with the meter reading and the complainant had paid Rs.1180008/- in cash. Later on, Pawan,

Lineman again demanded more money i.e. Rs.2,30,000/-, which was paid by brother of the complainant to Pawan. It is further submitted that the

petitioner was arrested in the FIR upon disclosure statement made by co-accused; he is not involved in any other case and there is no proper sanction

under Section 19 of the PC Act, as it does not bearing any date. It is also submitted that even as per allegations in the FIR, which are primarily against

co-accused Pawan, Lineman, it is a matter of trial whether there was any meeting of mind of the petitioner with co-accused Pawan or not. Learned

counsel further submits that challan has already been presented on 11.11.2020, however, the charges are yet to be framed, therefore, it will take long

time in conclusion of the trial.

Learned State counsel has not disputed the factual position. Without commenting anything on merits of the case, considering the aforesaid

submissions, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on regular bail subject to furnishing his bail/surety bonds to the

satisfaction of the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, concerned. Petition is disposed of.