VED PARKASH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD counsel for both the sides. By this common order, two petitions - Crl. Misc. No. 11500-M/2000 and Crl. Misc. No. 13275-M/2000 - are being disposed of as both the petitions arise out of the same FIR.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners contends that the occurrence is alleged to have taken place on 14.4.1998 at 10.30 a.m., and on the same day, on the statement of Vinod Kumar (2nd petitioner in Crl. Misc. No. 11500- M/2000), the FIR 378 of 98 was registered at Police Station City Sirsa in which about 13 persons including Bharat Singh and Nand Lal had been accused of causing death of Sube Singh for the use of fire-arm. He also contends that the police investigated the case, filed the charge-sheet and the case after commitment to the Court of Sessions, stands at the stage of evidence after the framing of charges.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners, therefore, contends that the petitioners are entitled to be released on bail inasmuch as the FIR is very much delayed and inasmuch as only lalkara has been attributed to the petitioners in Crl. Misc. 11500-M/2000. The learned counsel for the petitioners also points out that even petitioner-Om Parkash is entitled to be released on bail inasmuch as it is clear that petitioner-Om Parkash has sustained two fire-arm injuries resulting in the fracture of both his legs. As against this, learned counsel for the State contends that there are two versions and it has to be found out at the time of trial as to which one is correct.