MUSTAK KHILJEE Vs. STATE OF HARYANA
LAWS(P&H)-2011-2-305
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on February 10,2011

Mustak Khiljee Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF HARYANA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

S.S. Saron, J. - (1.) HEARD counsel for the parties.
(2.) THE Petitioner seeks pre -arrest bail in a case registered against him on 18.11.2008 for the offence under Section 379 IPC at Police Station DLF, Sector 29, Gurgaon. The FIR, in the case, has been registered on the statement of Tejbir Singh whose TATA 407 sky -blue colour was stolen from the vacant plot near the house of his younger brother. It was in the morning when the complainant discovered that the said vehicle which had been parked on the vacant plot has been stolen by an unknown person. The police after investigation, closed the case as an untraced one on 21.01.2009. Later on, an information was received from Rajasthan police on 11.05.2009 that the said vehicle has been recovered from one Naresh Kumar @ Kallu. Naresh Kumar @ Kallu was joined in the investigation in the present case and his disclosure statement was recorded on 08.07.2009 wherein he disclosed that he had stolen the TATA 407 vehicle along with Mustak Khiljee (Petitioner). Besides, he had changed the number plate and the vehicle was apprehended during checking by the District Transport Officer, Kota.
(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the Petitioner has submitted that the Petitioner is not involved in the case and he is sought to be falsely implicated. It is submitted that Naresh Kumar @ Kallu has wrongly named the Petitioner as he (Naresh Kumar @ Kallu) is not on good terms with the family of the Petitioner and was nursing a grudge against them. As regards the vehicle, it is submitted, that has already been recovered; besides, the petitioner is ready to join the investigation.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.