Judgment:
CRM-M No.24128 of 2014 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.24128 of 2014 Date of decision :
01. 08.2014 Ashok Kumar ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ..Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR Present: Mr. Jagjeet Beniwal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Satyawan Rathee, DAG, Haryana for the State. **** Mehinder Singh Sullar, J.
(Oral) Petitioner-Ashok Kumar son of Sahi Ram, has preferred the instant petition for the grant of concession of anticipatory bail, in a case registered against him, vide FIR No.372 dated 13.06.2014, on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 420, 448, 467, 468 and 471 IPC, by the police of Police Station City, Bhiwani.
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 assistance and after deep consideration of the Sumit Kumar 2014.08.01 16:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.24128 of 2014 -2- entire matter, to my mind, the present petition for anticipatory bail deserves to be accepted in this context.
4. During the course of preliminary hearing, the following order was passed by this Court on July 21, 2014:- “Learned counsel, inter alia, contended that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case by the complainant. In fact, the complainant and his other associates tried to interfere in the peaceful possession of the house in question of the petitioner. Then, he filed a suit for permanent injunction against him (complainant), in which, the Civil Court has restrained the defendants not to interfere in his possession. The argument is that the civil dispute has been given the colour of criminal prosecution by the complainant at the instance of the police particularly when the question of possession of disputed property is still sub-judice in Civil Court. Heard. Notice of motion be issued to the respondent, returnable for 01.08.2014. Meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to join the investigation before the next date of hearing. In the event of his arrest, the Arresting Officer would admit him to bail on his furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds in the sum of `25,000/- to his satisfaction.”. 5. At the very outset, on instructions from HC Kuldeep Singh, learned State counsel has acknowledged the relevant factual matrix and submitted that the petitioner has already joined the investigation. He is no longer required for further interrogation, at this stage. Moreover, 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 Sumit Kumar 2014.08.01 16:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.24128 of 2014 -3- (challan) against the accused, so, the final conclusion of trial will naturally take a long time.
6. In the light of aforesaid reasons and taking into consideration the totality of facts and circumstances, emanating from the record, as discussed here-in-above and without commenting further anything on merits, lest it may prejudice the case of either side, during the course of trial of main case, the instant petition for anticipatory bail is accepted. The interim bail already granted to the petitioner, by virtue of indicated order by this Court, is hereby made absolute, subject to the compliance of the conditions, as contemplated under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
7. Needless to mention that, nothing observed here-in-above, would reflect, in any manner, on merits of the case, as the same has been so recorded for a limited purpose of deciding the present petition for pre-arrest bail. At the same time, in case, the petitioner does not cooperate or join the investigation, the prosecution would be at liberty to move a petition for cancellation of his bail, in this Court. 01.08.2014 (Mehinder Singh Sullar) sumit.k Judge Sumit Kumar 2014.08.01 16:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document