CRM No.M-31544 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:-18.11.2010 Chand Singh alias Nand Singh son of Sunder Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR Present:- Mr.Gurcharan Dass, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Vikas Malik, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. M ehinder S ingh S ullar , J . (Oral) Invoking the provisions of section 439 Cr.PC, petitioner Chand Singh alias Nand Singh son of Sunder Singh, has instituted the present petition for regular bail in a case registered against him alongwith his other co-accused, namely, Sukhdev Singh and Balbir Singh, by virtue of FIR No.230 dated 30.7.2009 (Annexure P1) on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under sections 302, 201 and 365 read with section 34 IPC, by the police of Police Station City Tohana, District Fatehabad. 2. Notice of the petition was issued to the State. 3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, going through the record with their valuable help and after deep consideration over the matter, to my mind, the present petition deserves to be accepted in this respect. 4. What is not disputed here is that the present case was registered on the basis of statement of complainant Harpal Singh, who appeared in the trial Court and made his statement (Annexure P3), wherein, he has specifically stated that he did not have the personal knowledge, as to who had taken away Sucha Singh (deceased) and who had killed him. There is no other direct evidence against CRM No.M-31544 of 2010 2 the petitioner. The prosecution case only revolves around the disclosure statements of the accused. Balbir Singh, co-accused of the petitioner, has already been allowed regular bail by the Sessions Judge. The petitioner was arrested on 5.8.2009 and since then he is in judicial custody. No useful purpose would be served to further detain him in jail. The conclusion of trial would naturally take long time. There is no history of previous involvement of the petitioner in any criminal case. 5. So, taking into consideration the nature of evidence against the petitioner and totality of other facts and circumstances, emanating from the record, as described here-in-above, to me, he is entitled to regular bail in the obtaining circumstances of the instant case. 6. In the light of the aforesaid reasons and without commenting further anything on merits, lest it may prejudice the case of either side during the course of the trial of the case, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court. 7. The instant petition is disposed of accordingly. 18.11.2010 (Mehinder Singh Sullar) AS Judge