NAVEEN Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has approached this Court seeking grant of regular bail in respect of a case registered vide FIR No.45 dtd. 15/2/2020, Police Station Rohtak Sadar, Rohtak, under Ss. 379-B, 397, 34 of Indian Penal Code and Ss. 25, 54 and 59 of Arms Act, wherein offences under Ss. 342 and 392 were added later on.

(2.) The FIR was lodged at the instance of Rohtash, wherein it is alleged that three persons had hired his taxi and that later the said three persons snatched the said taxi by brandishing a knife.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case and that the falsity of the case would be evident from the fact that when the complainant i.e. PW-1 Rohtash stepped into the witness box, he was declared hostile and categorically stated that the petitioner is not the person, who had snatched his car. Learned counsel, in this regard, has drawn the attention of this Court to the said statement (Annexure P-5).