PARDEEP Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order will dispose of both the afore-mentioned applications for regular bail filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in FIR No.316 dated 12.11.2011 under Sections 392,412, 420, 467, 468, 471, 201, 216, 120-B of Indian Penal Code and Section 25 of Arms Act, 1959 registered at Police Station Sadar Dadri, District Bhiwani.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record.

(3.) IT has been contended by learned counsel for petitioner- accused Mandeep that even as per order dated 19.12.2011 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Bhiwani, it has been argued by learned Public Prosecutor for the State that the request for remand of the accused dated 21.11.2011 factum of alleged recovery of Rs.50,000/- from petitioner- accused Mandeep was not mentioned, whereas the recovery from petitioner-accused of Rs.50,000/- has been shown to be effected on 20.11.2011. IT is further submitted that petitioner-accused has also been arrested on the basis of suspicion and the alleged recovery of currency notes has been planted upon him and hence, the offence, if any, made out is under Section 411 of 412 of IPC and no offence under Section 392 or 395 is made out against the petitioner-accused. Further submitted that petitioner has been continuing in custody since 17.11.2011 and trial is not likely to be concluded in near future as no witness has been examined so far.