DILAWAR Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has sought regular bail in FIR No.RCCHG512016S0014 (Annexure P-1) dated 06.10.2016, under Sections 120-B, 148, 149, 186, 188, 307, 353, 395, 427, 436 and 452 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, besides Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959, and Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, registered at Police Station CBI, SCB, Chandigarh, earlier registered as FIR No.118 dated 27.02.2016 at Police Station Urban Estate Rohtak.

(2.) Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner contends that the allegations in the FIR are that the petitioner along with other accused during the Jat agitation had attacked the residence and other establishments of the complainant. They are alleged to have indulged in arson and the buildings were set ablaze. The petitioner had incited the crowd to indulge in violence. Prior to the Jat agitation, he was not involved in any other case except in another case pertaining to the Jat agitation in February, 2016, wherein he was acquitted by the trial Court on 01.08.2019.

(3.) He, however, contends that the petitioner was not named in the FIR. The co-accused have been released on bail by various orders, copies whereof are at Annexures P-2 and P-3. No person was injured in the occurrence. The conclusion of the trial is likely to take a long time as charges have not yet been framed while 137 witnesses have been cited in the 'challan'. The petitioner is in custody for over 3 years and 7 months since his arrest on 20.04.2016. The petitioner is 54 years old and has served the Indian Air Force for 20 years as a technical hand. He was later employed in a company in Gujarat and is alleged to have come to Rohtak to participate in the Jat agitation.