Criminal Misc. No. M-35191 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-35191 of 2010 Date of decision :02.02.2011 Mufid ....Petitioner V/s State of Haryana ....Respondent BEFORE : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. Sarfraj Hussain, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Tarun Aggarwal, Sr. Deputy Advocate General, Haryana. RAJAN GUPTA J. (ORAL) This is a petition filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking regular bail in a case registered against the petitioner vide FIR No. 193 dated 23.05.2010 under Sections 395, 397 & 412 IPC at Police Station Camp Palwal. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner has been in custody for sufficiently long period and no recovery has to be effected from him. He is thus entitled to be enlarged on bail. Learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. Heard. Criminal Misc. No. M-35191 of 2010 2 The FIR was lodged by one Sudhir Dube who stated that on 23.05.2010 he was on his way to Itawa from Delhi in his vehicle No. HR- 51-AF-4575. His wife, two children and uncle were in the vehicle (Safari) and the same was being driven by his driver namely Dalip. At about 2.00 a.m. when they were crossing the area of Palwal, a white safari bearing No. UP-14AV-6239 having a blue light atop it overtook their vehicle and parked the same in front of their vehicle. The driver thinking that they had been stopped by government vehicle, stopped the safari. Thereafter, three boys alighted from the vehicle and took their vehicle to near by hills. They looted jewellery worn by wife of the complainant, a laptop, handi-cam camera, about 3 lacs rupees, a licensed revolver, vehicle itself and mobile phones. The accused were having country made pistols with them. In investigation name of the petitioner figured and ornaments and belongings of the victims were recovered from him. In view of the seriousness of allegations, magnitude of crime and punishment it would entail in the event of conviction of accused, I am of the considered view that petitioner is not entitled to concession of bail. The petition is devoid of merit and is hereby dismissed. February 02, 2011 (RAJAN GUPTA) Ajay JUDGE