CRM No. M 23149 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -- CRM No. M 23149 of 2010 Date of decision: 19.11.2010 Naveen alias T. T ........ Petitioner Versus State of Haryana .......Respondent(s) Coram: Hon'ble Ms Justice Nirmaljit Kaur -.- Present: Mr. Rajbir Sehrawat, Advocate for the petitioner Ms Preeti Chaudhary, AAG, Haryana for the respondent - State -.- 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest? Nirmaljit Kaur, J. (Oral) This is an application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No . 267 dated 31.10.2008 under Section 365, 302, 201, 212, 120-B of Indian Penal Code and Section 25, 54, 59 of Arms Act, registered at Police Station Sampla, District Rohtak. It is contended that offence under Section 302 IPC is not made. If at all, it is an offence under Section 201 IPC for destroying evidence. It is stated that the petitioner is not named in the FIR. Subsequently, a confessional statement of the present petitioner was CRM No. M 23149 of 2010 2 recorded. As per the confessional statement, the petitioner reached the spot after the occurrence and assisted the other accused in disposing the dead body. Ms Preeti Chaudhary, AAG, Haryana, on instructions from ASI Satpal Singh, states that confessional statement of co-accused Rajiv was also recorded. Even, as per his confessional statement, the only role attributed to the petitioner is that he helped the accused persons in burying the dead body and also in burning the clothes. At this stage, the said allegation makes out an offence under Section 201 of Indian Penal Code which is bailable offence. The petitioner is in custody since 19.09.2009. Bail to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtak. (Nirmaljit Kaur) Judge November 19, 2010 mohan