Sahil @ Sahil Rod vs State Of Haryana

Rajbir Sehrawat, J

This order shall dispose of aforesaid two petitions.

The present third petition by petitioner Sahil @ Sahil Rod and second petition by petitioner-Ankit Kamboj have been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

for grant of bail pending trial in case FIR No.1215 dated 13.12.2017 registered under Sections 148, 149, 302 & 307 IPC; Section 25 of the Arms Act

and Section 3 of the SC/ST Act, 1989 (offence under Section 34, was added later on) at Police Station Sadar Karnal, District Karnal.

It is contended by the counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners were not even named in the FIR. The persons named by the complainant in the

first version were declared innocent by the police. Thereafter, in the disclosure statement of the co-accused the names of the petitioners were brought

into the picture. Even as per the case of the prosecution, according to the disclosure statement of the co-accused, the petitioners are only alleged to

have caught hold of the deceased and no injury is attributed to either of the petitioners. It is further submitted that even during the trial the witnesses of

the prosecution have changed the version from the one given in the disclosure statement as well. Still further, it is submitted that one of the co-accused

of the petitioners, who was originally alleged to have caught hold of the deceased and alleged to have caused injury to the eye-witnesses, have been

granted bail pending trial by this court. The counsel have further submitted that the petitioners are in custody since January, 2018. They are not

required for any investigation purposes. Since, only 9 witnesses have been examined out of 25 witnesses, the trial is likely to take long time. Otherwise

also, the main witnesses of the prosecution have already been examined and there is no possibility of the petitioners tempering with the evidence of the

prosecution. It is also submitted that there is no other case against either of the petitioner.

On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Abhey Ram, has submitted that there are specific allegations against the

petitioners qua having participated in the crime. It is further submitted that the recovery of the motorcycle used in the crime was effected from the

petitioner-Sahil Rod and the petitioner-Ankit Kamboj had identified the place of occurrence. However, it is not disputed that the petitioners were not

named in the FIR. It is also not disputed that they are not attributed any injury to any person and that their role is restricted to catching hold of the

deceased, even as per the best case of the prosecution. Still further, it is not disputed that the co-accused of the petitioners has been released on bail

by this court and that only 9 witnesses, including the main witnesses of the prosecution, have been examined out of total 25 witnesses. The counsel for

the State has also not disputed that there is no other case against the petitioners.

In view of the above, but without expressing any further opinion on the merits of the case, the present petitions are allowed. The petitioners are

ordered to be released on bail pending trial subject to their furnishing bail bonds/surety to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate,

concerned.