Judgment:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-35337of 2013 (O&M) Date of decision: 04.02.2014 Harminder Singh Sooch ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and another ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE M.M.S.BEDI Present: Mr.Sunil Chada, Sr.Advocate with Mr.M.S.Athwal, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr.Deepak Garg, AAG, Punjab.
Ms.Paramjit Kaur, Advocate for respondent No.2.
***** M.M.S.BEDI,J,(Oral) Petitioner seeks cancellation of bail granted to respondent No.2, vide order dated 29.03.2013 on the ground that respondent no.2 has been granted concession of bail on the basis of compromise entered into on 29.03.2013.
As per the statement of petitioner, it infers that respondent No.2 Nariender Kumar Khanna had promised to transfer the property in the name of the petitioner from Omaxe Limited Lawrance Road, Amritsar.
I have gone through the statement of the petitioner made on 29.03.2013, wherein he has mentioned that the accused i.e.respondent No.2 had agreed to transfer the Smriti 2014.02.06 17:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-35337of 2013 (O&M) -2- property in the name of the petitioner.
Statement of respondent No.2 has also been perused by me wherein he, after hearing the statement of the petitioner had admitted the same in the Court on 29.03.2013.
The present petition for cancellation of bail seems to have been filed only to stop respondent No.2 in getting his passport released without complying with the terms of the compromise, on the basis of which he was granted concession of bail.
It is admitted fact that the passport of the petitioner is with the police.
A controveRs.has arisen regarding the terms and conditions of the compromise which was entered into at the time of grant of bail to respondent No.2.
Non-performance of one's part in a compromise in the present case will not warrant the cancellation of bail.
However, it is open to the petitioner to oppose the release of the passport to respondent No.2 on the ground that he has not complied with the terms of the agreement, which was entered into between the parties.
Trial Court shall carefully consider the circumstances alleged by the petitioner while considering the prayer of the respondent No.2 to release his passport.
In view of the above observations no ground is made out to cancel the bail of respondent No.2.
Dismissed.
04.02.2014 (M.M.S.BEDI) Smriti smriti JUDGE201402.06 17:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document