CRM-M-28037-2011 [ 1 ] CRM-M-31601-2011 :::::::: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (1) CRM-M-28037-2011 Date of decision:16.11.2011 Ashok ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ...Respondent (2) CRM-M-31601-2011 Date of decision:16.11.2011 Satbir @ Satyavir ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ...Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr. Aman Pal, Advocate, for the petitioner in CRM-M-28037-2011. Mr. Rakesh Nehra, Advocate, for the petitioner in CRM-M-31601-2011. Mr. Vikas Malik, AAG, Haryana. Mr. Babbar Bhan, Advocate, for the complainant. ***** Rakesh Kumar Jain, J. This order shall dispose of two petitions bearing CRM-M-28037-2011 titled as 'Ashok Vs. State of Haryana' [for short “first petition”] and CRM-M-31601-2011 titled as `Satbir @ Satyavir Vs. State of Haryana' [for short “second petition”] in which the petitioner(s) are praying for grant of regular bail in a pending trial case registered vide FIR No.210 dated 30.05.2010, under Sections 302, 449, 120-B, 34 of IPC and 25/54/59 of the Arms Act, 1959 at Police Station Sampla, District Rohtak. The FIR is registered on the statement of Smt. Sudesh, according to CRM-M-28037-2011 [ 2 ] CRM-M-31601-2011 :::::::: which at about 9.30 a.m., Sandeep son of Rohtash, Mandeep and two other unknown boys came to their house where her father-in-law, namely, Dhajja Ram was there and immediately thereafter, all of them fired 10/12 shots from their pistols. It is alleged that she alongwith her husband Kuldeep had witnessed the incident and when her husband raised a noise, all of them ran away from the spot alongwith their weapons. Her father-in-law had received injuries on the chest, mouth, stomach and neck and died at the spot. The cause of grudge was that her nephew Raj Kumar @ Nitu was named as an accused in the murder of Rakesh son of Rohtash. It was also alleged that prior to the incident, Deepak son of Balwan was roaming in the street on his motorcycle and gave information about the presence of her father-in-law to Sandeep etc. She has further alleged that the murder has been committed by Bhagwan, Dilbagh, Dharampal, Anand, Malkiat son of Rohtash, Himmat @ Fauji son of Phool Singh and their accomplices Nitu son of Ranbir, Jaipal, Tekram, Nirmala wife of Rohtash, Sheela wife of Phool Kanwar, Kamlesh wife of Bhagwan, Poonam wife of Shilak, Bala wife of Malar @ Dharampal and Naresh wife of Anand in a planned manner after hatching the conspiracy. In the first petition, it is submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 18.06.2010, whereas in the second petition, the petitioner was taken into custody on 17.08.2010. It is alleged that for one murder, 21 accused have been roped in by the police. The common stand of the petitioner(s) is that as the challan has already been presented and the prosecution evidence is going on, therefore, there is no purpose which could be served by further detaining them in custody. On the contrary, the bail applications are opposed on the ground that it is a gang war going on in the area as there are about 22 cases involving Bhagwan Singh gang and his family members, which are detailed as under: Sr. No. FIR No. Under Sections Police Station 1. 61/92 Explosives Act & Arms Act Nangloi, Delhi 2. 86/96 25/54/59 Arms Act Sampla, Haryana 3. 170/98 302 IPC Sampla, Haryana 4. 109/2000 323/307/34 IPC Sampla, Haryana 5. 50/02 307 IPC Sampla, Haryana CRM-M-28037-2011 [ 3 ] CRM-M-31601-2011 :::::::: Sr. No. FIR No. Under Sections Police Station 6. 181/02 285/34 IPC Sampla, Haryana 7. 95/03 452/323/506/34 IPC Sampla, Haryana 8. 277/03 307/452/506/34 IPC & 25/54/59 Arms Act Sampla, Haryana 9. 187/04 148/149/323/325/506 IPC Sampla, Haryana 10. 105/05 302 IPC Sampla, Haryana 11. 264/08 302 IPC Sampla, Haryana 12. 130/10 332/353/186/506 IPC Sampla, Haryana 13. 210/10 302/449/34/120-B IPC & 25/54/59 Arms Act Sampla, Haryana 14. 239/98 392 IPC Sadar, Rohtak, Haryana 15. 307/01 332/353/186/506/34 IPC Sadar, Rohtak, Haryana 16. 95/99 302/307/148/149/452 IPC Civil Lines, Rohtak 17. 320/02 302 IPC Civil Lines, Rohtak 18. 517/10 323/506/34 IPC Civil Lines, Rohtak 19. 484/04 302/34 IPC Civil Lines, Rohtak 20. 97/03 302 IPC Gohana, Sonipat 21. 41/02 25 Arms Act Chaprouli, Bhagpat, UP It is also submitted that one of the co-accused, namely, Anand, who has been similarly named as Satbir, had earlier applied for bail vide CRM-M-10538-2011 which has been dismissed by this Court vide its order dated 16.05.2011. It is also submitted that the petitioner in the first petition is the person out of 4 persons who had committed the murder of Dhajja Ram and the gun has been recovered from him, whereas Satbir @ Satyavir, petitioner in the second petition, is the brain behind it. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find these cases to be fit for grant of bail. Hence, both the petitions are hereby dismissed. A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of another connected case. November 16, 2011 (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) vinod* JUDGE