IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CRM-M-30838 of 2011 Decided on 23.12.2011 Umardeen alias Kale --Petitioner vs. State of Haryana --Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr. R.D.Yadav,Advocate, for the petitioner Mr.Sagar Deswal,AAG, Haryana RAKESH KUMAR JAIN,J: (ORAL) This is a petition for bail pending trial in a case registered vide FIR No.418 dated 25.12.2010, under Sections 379 and 328 of the IPC at Police Station, Dharuhera, District Rewari. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the FIR is registered by Kuldeep, who had alleged that he was second driver on a truck where as the first driver was Chattar Singh. On 02.12.2010, they had stopped their vehicle at National Highway No.8 for taking dinner. At that time, Chattar Singh had received a phone call from the owner of the vehicle that he was required at Kotputli. Thereafter, the complainant remained alone with the truck and after taking his dinner, he went on to sleep after locking the vehicle. When he got up at 4 a.m, he found his vehicle missing. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is involved in this case on his disclosure statement made in another case when he was in custody of Delhi Police. He further submitted that offence under Section 328 IPC has been added later on. Learned counsel has further submitted that similar case was registered against the CRM-M-30838 of 2011 -2- petitioner vide FIR No.16 at Police Station Dharuhera for which he was in jail and had applied for bail vide CRM-M- 3705 of 2001 which has been allowed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court on 22.12.2011. Learned counsel for the respondent, while opposing the bail application, has vehemently argued that the petitioner is a hardened criminal as he is involved in another case which has been registered in U.P. He further submits that the petitioner and his gang-members had administered intoxicant in the food of the innocent drivers for the purpose of committing the theft of their vehicles. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is in custody from 26.7.2011 and the challan has already been presented and the case is now fixed for 16.1.2012 for evidence of the prosecution. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and specially the fact that the petitioner has been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in a similar case but without making any observation on merits, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. 23.12.2011 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) RR Judge