CHOTTU RAM Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is seeking regular bail in FIR No.RCCHG0012018S0005 dtd. 15/10/2018, under Sec. 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 and Ss. 302, 34 IPC, registered at Police Station CBI SCB, Chandigarh (Annexure P-2) originally registered at Police Station Dabwali, District Sirsa as FIR No.15 dtd. 12/1/2017, under Ss. 148, 149, 302, 307, 120-B, 212, 506 IPC and Ss. 25/54 of the Arms Act, 1959.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is not named in the FIR and has been arraigned as an accused on the basis of extra judicial confession of co-accused Sukhwinder @ Minda and Mukh Ram who have been released on bail. She also submits that the allegations against the petitioner are that he had conspired with the other accused in getting the deceased killed while he was in custody in another case when the alleged incident took place. She also contends that the co-accused Ravinder had been granted regular bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court in CRM-M-31736-2020 on 10/11/2020 while co-accused Mukh Ram @ Kalu has been granted interim bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court in CRM-M-31682-2017 on 10/11/2020. She further contends that the co-accused Ravinder was also involved in other criminal cases and he had been in custody for over 3 years when he had been granted regular bail. The petitioner is in custody for over 5 years and 3 months and the trial is not making any headway. The petitioner is 50 years old and only 5 out of 129 prosecution witnesses have been examined and it would take a while for the trial to be concluded.

(3.) Learned counsel for the CBI submits that one of the persons who were killed in the incident was a member of the Lawrence Bishnoi gang, the petitioner himself has criminal antecedents and he should not be granted the concession of regular bail. He also submits that the petitioner was also involved in two other cases pertaining to use of mobile phone while he was in jail. He also submits that 5 out 129 prosecution witnesses have been examined and efforts would be made to examine the remaining prosecution witnesses expeditiously.