Pawan Kumar vs State of Haryana

Alok Singh, J.—This is an application seeking regular bail in case F.I.R. No. 246, dated 22.07.2010, under Sections 302/307/120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25/54/59 of the Arms Act, registered at Police Station Gannaur, District Sonepat.

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner states that Petitioner has lodged four F.I.Rs. against the complainant party prior to the incident. As per the learned Counsel for the accused-Petitioner, Petitioner was said to be in the car and at his instance, other co-accused Sunil, Rajinder and Amit have fired at Parveen deceased. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has vehemently argued that since no specific role has been attributed to the Petitioner and challan has already been submitted in the Court, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the Petitioner in the judicial custody.

Mr. Gaurav Dhir, learned Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, on the instructions of I.O. Jagdish Chander, has vehemently argued that Parveen was killed at the behest of Pawan Kumar, present accused-Petitioner since there was long standing enmity between the parties.

Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, I find some substance in the arguments of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that Petitioner has not been attributed any specific role. Present petition is allowed. Let, Petitioner be released on bail to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.