Punjab-Haryana High CourtDr. Subhash Sethi vs State Of Haryana on 4 July, 2014Author:Mehinder Singh SullarBench:Mehinder Singh SullarCRM No.M-21052 of 2014                          -1-



                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                                              CHANDIGARH


                                                   CRM No.M-21052 of 2014
                                                   Date of Decision: - 04.07.2014


                     Dr. Subhash Sethi
                                                                              .....Petitioner

                                                        Versus

                     State of Haryana
                                                                             .....Respondent



                     CORAM:        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR


                     Present:      Mr. Amol Rattan Sidhu, Senior Advocate,
                                   with Mr. Amit Sharma, Advocate
                                   for the petitioner.

                                   Mr. Rajat Mor, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana
                                   for the State.

                                   ****MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR , J.(oral)

                                   Petitioner-Dr. Subhash Sethi son of Megh Raj Sethi, has

                     preferred the instant petition for the grant of regular bail, in a case

                     registered against him, vide FIR No.213 dated 07.06.2014, on accusation

                     of having committed the offences punishable underSections 120-Band180IPC andSections 3,4,6,23and25, Rule 9 ofThe Pre-Conception

                     and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act,

                     1994(hereinafter to be referred as 'the PNDT Act'), by the police of

                     Police Station Model Town, District Rewari.Kumar Naresh2014.07.10 09:45I attest to the accuracy andintegrity of this documentChandigarhCRM No.M-21052 of 2014                             -2-2.          Notice of the petition was issued to the State.3.          After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, going

                     through the record with their valuable help and after deep consideration

                     of the entire matter, to my mind, the present petition for regular bail

                     deserves to be accepted in this context.4.          Precisely, the prosecution claimed that, on 07.06.2014 the

                     petitioner has determined the pregnancy of a decoy women, namely,

                     Meena for his illegal gains. It is not a matter of dispute that, the

                     competent authority has already filed a private complaint against the

                     petitioner under Section 28 of the PNDT Act, with regard to the same

                     very incident. In that eventuality, as to whether two criminal cases of the

                     same occurrence are maintainable or not, inter alia, would be the moot

                     point to be decided during the course of trial Court.5.          Be that as it may, the petitioner was arrested on 07.06.2014.

                     Since then, he is in judicial custody and no useful purpose would be

                     served to further detain him in jail. There is no history of his previous

                     involvement in any other criminal case. All the offences alleged against

                     the accused are triable by the Court of Magistrate. Even, since the

                     prosecution has not yet submitted the final police report (challan) against

                     the accused, so, the final conclusion of trial will naturally take a long

                     time.6.          In the light of aforesaid reasons, taking into consideration the

                     totality of facts and circumstances, emanating from the record, as

                     discussed here-in-above and without commenting further anything onKumar Naresh2014.07.10 09:45I attest to the accuracy andintegrity of this documentChandigarhCRM No.M-21052 of 2014                               -3-merits, lest it may prejudice the case of either side during the course of

                     trial, the instant petition for regular bail is hereby accepted. The petitioner

                     is ordered to be released on regular bail on his filing a specific affidavit

                     that he will not indulge in such activities in future and on his furnishing

                     adequate bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Chief

                     Judicial Magistrate, Rewari.July 04, 2014                                 (MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR)
                     naresh.k                                             JUDGEKumar Naresh2014.07.10 09:45I attest to the accuracy andintegrity of this documentChandigarh