Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ajmer vs State Of Haryana on 17 February, 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT
CHANDIGARH
Crl. Misc. No. M-400 of 2014 (O&M)
Date of Decision: February 17, 2014.
Ajmer
...... PETITIONER(s)
Versus
State of Haryana
...... RESPONDENT (s)
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA
Present: Mr. Jasjit S. Bedi, Senior Advocate with
Mr. Vikram Punia, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Raja Sharma, A.A.G. Haryana.
Mr. Rajbir Sehrawat, Advocate
for the complainant.
*****
RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral)
The present petition has been filed for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure in FIR No.690 dated 27.08.2013 under Sections 306 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station City Jind, District Jind.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record including the impugned order passed by learned Mehta Sachin 2014.02.18 10:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CHANDIGARH CRM No.M-400 of 2014 2 Additional Sessions Judge, Jind dismissing anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner.
This Court while issuing notice of motion on 13.1.2014 passed the following order:-
"Inter alia contends that petitioner has been implicated in this case as he was a mediator for finalisation of marriage of the deceased with co-accused Anil. It is further submitted that similar allegations were levelled against the petitioner by the deceased in FIR No.126 dated 9.2.2013, Annexure P2, for offences under Sections 323, 406, 498A, 506 IPC. However, after investigation petitioner was found innocent by the police and the challan was filed against co-accused, i.e., in-laws of the deceased. It is also submitted that co- accused, i.e., in-laws of the deceased, have already been arrested in this case. Further contended that petitioner is ready to join the investigation and cooperate with the police.
Notice of motion to Advocate General, Haryana, for 17.2.2014.
However, in the meantime, petitioner is directed to join the investigation and in case he is arrested, he shall be released on interim bail by the Arresting Officer to his satisfaction subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C."
It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner- accused that he has been implicated in this case as he was a mediator for finalisation of marriage of deceased with co-accused Anil. Further contended that similar, allegations were levelled against the petitioner by Mehta Sachin 2014.02.18 10:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CHANDIGARH CRM No.M-400 of 2014 3 the deceased in FIR No.126 dated 9.2.2013, for offences under Sections 323, 406, 498A, 506 IPC and however, after investigation petitioner was found innocent by the police and the challan was filed against co- accused, i.e., in-laws of the deceased who were already arrested in this case. It is further submitted that admittedly deceased left the matrimonial home on 29.06.2012 after some incident had taken place in her in-laws house on 28.06.2012 and FIR 126 dated 9.2.2013 was got registered by her on 09.02.2013 levelling allegations against the petitioner that he used to administer some injections to her due to which her hand stopped working. Further submitted that when she was residing in her parental house for the last more than one year, there was no question of petitioner administering any injection to her. Further submitted that she died in the house of her parents after about one year and two months of leaving her matrimonial home. Further submitted that as per medical report, she was having 'writer's cramp' and nothing was mentioned in the medical record that her hand became useless due to administering of some injection/medicine. It is also contended that deceased was a lecturer in Computer Science and hence, she used to work at computer and the disease 'writer's cramp' is common in the persons who constantly work on computers. Further submitted that petitioner is having no relation with the deceased and that he has already joined the investigation pursuant to the order dated 13.01.2014.
It has also been stated by learned counsel for the State on instructions from ASI Suresh Kumar that petitioner has joined the Mehta Sachin 2014.02.18 10:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CHANDIGARH CRM No.M-400 of 2014 4 investigation and that he is no more required for any custodial interrogation. Bail application has not been opposed by learned counsel for the respondent-State.
However, bail application has been opposed by learned counsel for the complainant on the plea that police is in connivance with the petitioner who is a Government servant and is not arresting him. It has also been contended that petitioner is son of maternal uncle of mother-in-law of deceased. It has also been contended that his name is mentioned in the suicide note and hence, he is not entitled for anticipatory bail.
There are no allegations on behalf of the State that petitioner is likely to abscond or that he is likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts in the Court, if released on bail.
In view of aforementioned facts and particularly in view of the stand taken by the respondent-State, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of petitioner Ajmer is accepted and order dated 13.01.2014 granting interim bail in favour of the petitioner is, hereby, made absolute subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
The present petition stands disposed of accordingly.
( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) February 17, 2014. JUDGE Sachin M. Mehta Sachin 2014.02.18 10:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CHANDIGARH