SUNIL MALIK Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed the present petition under Sec. 439 Cr.PC with a prayer to grant regular bail in case FIR No. 251 dtd. 19/5/2023 registered under Sec. 25 of Arms Act and under Sec. 34,379-B of IPC ( Ss. 120-B, 307,467,468,471 of IPC and Sec. 29 of Arms Act added later on) Police Station Sector 32-33, Karnal.

(2.) The FIR in the present case was registered on the basis of the statement moved by Brij Mohan Singla. As per him, at about 08:30 PM on 18/5/2023, he was going home on his motorcycle and he parked his motorcycle in front of his house and locked it. He was carrying a bag in his hand, which contained cash and empty food tiffin and in the meantime, 02 boys came on motorcycle and by showing a pistol they attempted to snatch bag from him, however, he did not hand over the bag to them. On this, one of the assailants trying to fire at him, but the pistol did not work. After that, he took out a knife from his pant pocket and hit on the left side of his stomach and also stabbed on his right hand, but the complainant did not give the bag to them. Ultimately, two boys snatched a sum of Rs.7000.00 and the documents from the pocket of shirt and fled away.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner was not named in the FIR. Even he was not present at the place of alleged occurrence and as per the prosecution story, he had not participated in the alleged occurrence. Learned counsel further submits that he has been named as an accused on the basis of statement made by co-accused and as per the story of the prosecution, the petitioner had supplied the fire arm to co-accused, Rishu, however, the said fire arm was not used in the alleged occurrence. Learned counsel next contends that the petitioner is in custody since 3/6/2023 and further custody of the petitioner will not serve any meaningful purpose.