IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-12468 of 2009 (O/M). Date of Decision : September 22, 2009. Preetu s/o Dhajja Ram ...... Petitioner(s). Versus. State of Haryana ..... Respondent(s). CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH. Present:- Mr. Kartar Singh Malik-I, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Mr. Ashok Kumar Jindal, A.A.G. Haryana, for respondent-State. AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL). Counsel for the petitioner submits that Rajesh s/o Ruldu Ram, who is the complainant, had stated before the Trial Court that the petitioner was not seen by him at the place of incident. He further submits that the wife of the deceased Rajwanti had also stated before the Trial Court in her statement that the petitioner has not murdered her husband. He on this basis submits that both the two eye-witnesses had categorically stated before the Trial Court that the petitioner has not committed the murder. In this view of the fact, he prays for benefit of bail. He further contends that the petitioner in is custody since 05.10.2008 and no useful purpose would be served as the prosecution has failed even after passing of one year to complete its evidence. Criminal Misc. No. M-12468 of 2009. On the other hand, counsel for respondent-State submits that the next date of hearing before the Trial Court is 30.09.2009 and the remaining witnesses would be examined on that date i.e. three in number. I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the case. In view of categoric statement made by complainant Rajesh and Rajwanti wife of deceased, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) JUDGE September 22, 2009. sjks. -2-