CRM-M-15932-2011 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-15932-2011 (O&M) Date of Decision:04.10.2011 Pramod Kumar ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ... Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr. B.S.Malik, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Vikas Malik, AAG, Haryana. ***** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. (ORAL) This is a petition for grant of regular bail in a case registered vide FIR No.64 dated 20.03.2010, under Sections 392, 412, 120-B, 34 IPC and 25/54/59 of the Arms Act at Police Station Nagina, District Nuh. The FIR is registered at the instance of Tahir who had alleged that four persons, namely, Ajmat, Akhtar, Zakir and Illayas have not only snatched Rs.50,000/-, license and identity card from the complainant, but had also taken away his tractor and cutter machine. During investigation, it has been found that co-accused Ajmal is a dealer in the sale and purchase of the tractors on commission basis who had sold the tractor of the complainant at the instance of Ajmat and Akhtar to Nand Kishore. The petitioner is allegedly named by the said Nand Kishore as the Driver of the stolen tractor, which is allegedly purchased by Nand Kishore, but he was not apprehended at the spot. Even the said tractor was recovered when it was taken for the purpose its sale. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody from 01.12.2010, whereas the main accused, namely, Ajmat and Zakir, who have allegedly stolen the tractor of the complainant and had sold it to Nand Kishore, have already been released on bail. He further submits that no PW has been examined so far and the trial is not making any headway. Learned State counsel submits that the petitioner is a habitual offender against whom as many as 7 cases of similar offence of theft etc. 1 CRM-M-15932-2011 (O&M) have been registered. He also submits that two co-accused, namely, Zakir and Ill ayas could not be arrested till date. In this regard, learned counsel for the petitioner has reproduced the details of the aforesaid cases which have allegedly been registered against the petitioner, at page no.7 of the petition and has submitted that in the cases mentioned at Sr. Nos.1 to 4, the petitioner is on bail, whereas in the cases mentioned at Sr. Nos.5 and 6 he is not even named. He also submits that the petitioner is neither involved in the robbery/theft and also not involved in the purchase of the stolen property in order to attract the provisions of Sections 392, 120-B and 412 of the IPC as it is disclosed by Nand Kishore in custody of the police that he was merely a Driver of the said tractor. After hearing both the learned counsel for the parties, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case, but without making any observation on the merits, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds alongwith two heavy local sureties to the satisfaction of the learned Trail Court. October 04, 2011. ( Rakesh Kumar Jain ) vinod* Judge 2