AJAY KUMAR Vs. STATE OF H P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been filed for seeking regular bail in case FIR No. 102/2018, dated 18.07.2018, under Sec. 379/34 of IPC, Police Station Nagrota Bagwan, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh. The petitioner is behind the bar, since 21.07.2018 for commission of an offence. A status report was filed on previous date of hearing. At that time, it was revealed that the case was listed for recording of evidence before the learned Trial Court on 27.12.2018 and 28.12.2018, whereupon, the State was directed to have instructions with respect to the latest status of recording of evidence.

(2.) Learned Additional Advocate General, submits that five witnesses have to be examined, however, learned counsel for the petitioner states that only police officials are to be examined and the material witnesses stand examined and now, for that purpose, the case is listed on 14.01.2019 in the Trial Court.

(3.) The petitioner has been subjected to trial for stealing a Maruti car No. HP-39A-1385, from Nagrota Bagwan, which was abandoned by him and his co-accused at Dehra road near Jawala Mukhi, when it met with an accident. After lodging the complaint by the owner of the vehicle, during investigation two persons i.e. accused in present case were arrested by the police in case FIR No. 113/2018 dated 21.07.2018 under Sec. 379 read with Sec. 34 IPC, registered in Police Station, Palampur and during the interrogation in that case by Palampur Police, the accused persons had disclosed about the theft of vehicle involved in present case. On receiving information the investigating officer from Police Station, Nagrota Bagwan, had also interrogated the petitioner and his co-accused who had disclosed the manner, in which the car was stolen by them, in his disclosure statement recorded under Sec. 27 of Indian Evidence Act.