KAMLESH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has applied for regular bail under Section 437(6) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short,'Cr.P.C.') in case FIR No. 263 dated 14.8.2007, registered under Sections 406/420 IPC, at Police Station, Civil Lines, Rohtak.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has argued that charge in this case was framed on 15.4.2009 and first date for prosecution evidence was fixed for 15.5.2009. Since the prosecution has not completed its evidence, therefore, in view of Section 437(6) Cr.P.C, the petitioner is entitled to be released on regular bail as he is in custody since 23.12.2008.

(3.) FROM the perusal of the afore-stated facts, it is clear that the petitioner is in custody since 23.12.2008. The charge was framed on 15.4.2009. The first date for prosecution evidence was fixed as 12.5.2009. The case was adjourned to 18.5.2009 on the request of learned defence counsel. Thereafter, on 18.5.2009, PW Raj Kumar was cross examined but summons issued to the remaining witnesses were not received back served or otherwise. On 13.6.2009, despite service, Head Constable Budh Ram did not appear and was summoned through bailable warrants. On 11.7.2009, two PWs were present but could not be examined as they did not bring the complete record. On 20.7.2009, the case was transferred from the Court of Mr. Chander Hass, Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Rohtak, to the Court of Mr. Sunil Chauhan, Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Rohtak. On 08.8.2009, seven PWs were present but since Court time was over, therefore, out of seven PWs, only two PWs could be examined. Thus, the delay that has been caused is not attributed to the petitioner.