Criminal Misc. No. M-13718 of 2009 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. Criminal Misc. No. M-13718 of 2009 Date of Decision: 21.5.2009 Harpreet Singh alias Happy and Others …Petitioners Versus State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. Present: Mr. Ritesh Pandey, Advocate for the petitioners. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) In Criminal Misc. No. M-52 of 2009, this Court had passed the following order:- “Allegations against the petitioners are that on the night of 7.11.2008 at 10:00 p.m., they tied Pargat Singh and Charan Singh and had fled away with the truck loaded with paddy. If this kind of dacoity/robbery is permitted, roads will not be safe. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that this case is of magisterial trial. Offence under Section 392 Cr.P.C. is triable by the court of Magistrate. Counsel states that the trial will take long Criminal Misc. No. M-13718 of 2009 2 time to conclude. In such situations, the Code of Criminal Procedure has envisaged Section 437 (6) Cr.P.C. which reads as under:- “(6) If, in any case triable by a Magistrate, the trial of a person accused of any non-bailable offence is not concluded within a period of sixty days from the first date fixed for taking evidence in the case, such person shall, if he is in custody during the whole of the said period, be released on bail to the satisfaction of the Magistrate, unless for reasons to be recorded in writing, the Magistrate otherwise directs. Prayer made by the petitioner in the present petition is declined. Petition stands dismissed. However, petitioner is at liberty to approach the trial Court under Section 437(6) Cr.P.C.” Petitioner had approached the trial Court for grant of regular bail under Section 437(6) Cr.P.C. Trial Court had declined the bail by observing as under:- “...A reasonable possibility of the presence of accused not being secured at the trial, reasonable apprehension of witness being tampered with the Criminal Misc. No. M-13718 of 2009 3 larger interest of public or the State and similar other consideration. This Court has gone through the facts of the present case, the accused committed robbery on 7.11.2008 at 10.00 PM on the road by tying Pargat Singh and Charan Singh and had fled away with the truck loaded with paddy. The accused have committed very heinous offence. These kind of offences are security threat to public at large and are serious concern for the State. If this kind of offence are permitted the security of general public and roads are in danger. So this Court is of considered opinion that the accused are not entitled to the concession of bail. So their application is dismissed”. For the reasons stated in the impugned order whereby Judicial Magistrate Ist class, Zira, had declined the bail, this Court is of the view that the balance is to be maintained and liberty of the petitioner is also to be taken into consideration. Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial within four months from today. With the observations made above, the present petition is disposed off. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge May 21, 2009 “DK”