MANOJ SONI Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above detailed three regular bail applications under Section 439 Cr.P.C., third application by accused petitioner Manoj Soni and second by petitioners Deepak Kochar and Anil, having arisen in the same very case bearing FIR No.402 dated 22.04.2016 under Sections 302, 201, 120-B, 34 IPC and Section 25/54/59 of the Arms Act pertaining to Police Station Civil Lines, Rohtak, are being taken up for disposal together for the sake of brevity.

(2.) The present case was got registered by complainant Mahesh Verma alleging that his elder brother Ashok Kumar alias Kaka (since deceased) had constructed a showroom under the name and style of M/s S.S. Jewellers. It is alleged that on the day of occurrence i.e. 22.04.2016 around 6:15 a.m. while the deceased along with the complainant and another brother were walking on the footpath in the public park, three young boys came armed with firearms and fired at the deceased leading to his instantaneous death. It was during the course of investigations it transpired that the deceased had a property dispute with his cousins Manoj Soni and Sanjay Soni, and the latter managed to sell off the disputed property to co-accused non-applicant Virender and the latter hatched a conspiracy with his co-accused, servant Anil, Deepak Kochar and Manoj Soni all petitioners along with Ashok, Rohit, Sandeep alias Kala, Akash (minor), Satish, Pankaj and Sunil all non-applicants and by means of contract killing had killed the deceased leading to registration of the present case and arrest of the petitioners.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the petitioners are behind bars since a long time and no specific role is attributed to petitioners Anil, Deepak Kochar and Manoj Soni in the initial FIR and subsequently their names have cropped up and evidence fabricated to implead them because of the property dispute. It is contended that investigation and trial are not likely to conclude in the near future and thus, no useful purpose will be served by keeping the petitioners in custody.