Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 8, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Amit vs State Of Haryana And Anr on 26 February, 2018

Author: Jaishree Thakur

Bench: Jaishree Thakur

Crl. Misc. M-32159 of 2017                                                       -1-



    IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND
                HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

                                             Crl. Misc. M-32159 of 2017 (O&M)
                                             Date of Decision: February 26, 2018

Amit

                                                                       ...Petitioner

                                           Versus

State of Haryana and another

                                                                    ...Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR

Present:-    Mr. Amrainder Singh, Advocate
             for the petitioner.

             Mr. A.S. Sandhu, Addl. AG Punjab.

             Mr. D.S. Sharma, Advocate
             for complainant-respondent No.2 in person.

             Parties in person.

                                       ********

JAISHREE THAKUR, J. (Oral)

The instant petition has been filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.552 dated 15.07.2017, under Sections 498-A, 406, 506, 377, 354-A, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station Sector 7, Faridabad, District Faridabad.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is falsely implicated in the present case and on the direction of this Court, has joined the investigation. It is also contended that nothing is to be recovered from him.

1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 04-03-2018 02:58:00 ::: Crl. Misc. M-32159 of 2017 -2- Learned State counsel, on instructions from Investigating Officer, submits that petitioner has joined the investigation and he is not required for the custodial interrogation.

In view of the facts that the petitioner is not required for custodial interrogation and has joined the investigation, without commenting on the merits of the case, the petition is allowed and order dated 31.08.2017 granting interim bail to the petitioner is made absolute subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438 Sub Section 2 Clauses (i)

(ii) and (iii) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.




                                                (JAISHREE THAKUR)
February 26, 2018                                     JUDGE
vijay saini




Whether speaking/reasoned                              Yes
Whether reportable                                     Yes/No




                                 2 of 2
              ::: Downloaded on - 04-03-2018 02:58:02 :::