DEEPINDER PAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Concededly, the various endeavours made by the petitioner to obtain anticipatory bail proved abortive. The petitioner is averred to be a student of Engineering. The gun, with which a shot is averred to have been fired by the petitioner herein, was duly licensed in the name of his grand father and it stands recovered.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant argues that the petitioner herein deserves to be detained for a longer duration in the larger interest of the society and also because he is likely to tamper with the evidence, by threatening the witnesses, if released on bail. The precedent-related practice that the grant of bail is a rule and denial thereof is an exception. For the reasons noticed in the course of the preceding paras of this order, I do not find any justification to order any further detention of the petitioner in jail.

(3.) There is no amount of public interest involved which would justify further detention of the petitioner in jail. If the apprehension in the mind of the complainant turns out to be true, it will ofcourse be open to him to make a plea for cancellation of bail granted to the petitioner. Without expressing any opinion on merits, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. Disposed of accordingly.