IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-10925 of 2011 Date of Decision: April 19, 2011 Court on its own Motion ….Petitioner Versus State of Haryana … Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH 1. Whether reporters of local news papers may be Allowed to see judgment? 2. To be referred to reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr. N.K. Sanghi, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Gaurav Dhir, DAG, Haryana, for the respondent-State. Alok Singh, J. (Oral) Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court had took suo moto cognizance in the matter vide order dated 28.03.2011 and thereafter has directed to place present matter before this Bench vide order dated 06.04.2011. Present case pertains to FIR No. 41 dated 03.03.2010, Police Station Udyog Vihar, Gurgaon, under Section 394 IPC. Crl. Misc. No.M-10925 of 2011 Mr. N.K. Sanghi, learned counsel appearing for the accused-juvenile (Rohit son of Ajit Singh), states that six cases were registered against the juvenile-accused in Delhi and out of six cases, juvenile accused has already been discharged in four cases and has been acquitted in one case and in the sixth case, he was found guilty and was sentenced to the period already undergone. Mr. Sanghi has further argued that only two cases are pending against the accused-juvenile in Haryana and total sentence which can be awarded to the juvenile is three years and out of three years maximum period, he has already undergone almost one year, therefore, he is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Mr. Gaurav Dhir, learned Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, on the instructions of S.I. Mahipal, states that now trial is almost complete and is fixed for 28.04.2011 for examination of remaining five witnesses, therefore, there is no inordinate delay in the trial. He has further stated that if juvenile is released on bail, he may come into the company of other criminals. Mr. Sanghi, learned counsel appearing for the juvenile-accused, has stated that at this stage, it cannot be presumed that Trial Court shall pass sentence for maximum period of three years. Trial Court can pass sentence for any period extending to three years. Mr. Sanghi, while placing 2 Crl. Misc. No.M-10925 of 2011 reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the matter of State of Kerala vs. Raneef reported in 2011 (1) R.C.R. (Criminal) 381, has argued that trial is not likely to be concluded at the earliest. He has further stated that there is nothing on record to suggest that juvenile shall join the company of hard core criminals after release on bail. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, I direct that juvenile-accused (Rohit son of Ajit Singh) be enlarged on bail on furnishing personal bond by the father of the juvenile and one surety to the satisfaction of Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Gurgaon in the present case i.e. case FIR No. 41 dated 03.03.2010, under Section 394 IPC registered at Police Station Udyog Vihar, Gurgaon. April 19, 2011 ( Alok Singh ) vkd Judge 3