Punjab-Haryana High Court
Hari Mohan And Others vs State Of Haryana on 22 August, 2014
Author: Mehinder Singh Sullar
Bench: Mehinder Singh Sullar
CRM-M No. 10504 of 2014 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M No. 10504 of 2014
Date of decision : 22.08.2014
Hari Mohan and others
...Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana
..Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR
Present: Mr. Ashok Tyagi, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr. Rajat Mor, DAG, Haryana
for the State.
Mr. R.K. Bansal, Advocate
for respondent No.2.
****
Mehinder Singh Sullar, J. (Oral)
Petitioners have preferred the instant petition for the grant of concession of anticipatory bail, in a case registered against them, vide FIR No. 17 dated 13.01.2014, on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 323, 506, 452 read with Section 34 IPC, by the police of Police Station Manesar, District Gurgaon.
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 KUMAR SUMIT 2014.08.23 12:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No. 10504 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, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court (Mahavir S. Chauhan J.) passed the following order on March, 25, 2014:-
"Contends that Section 452, IPC, has been added later on, only to make the offence cognizable, otherwise, only simple injuries have been attributed to the petitioners.
Notice of motion for 06.05.2014.
In the meantime, in the event of arrest of the petitioners, they shall be admitted to interim bail to the satisfaction of the arresting officer and subject to compliance of provisions of Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973."
5. At the very outset, on instructions from SI Ghanshyam Dass, learned State counsel has acknowledged the relevant factual matrix and submitted that the petitioners have already joined the investigation. They are no longer required for further interrogation, at this stage. There is no history of their previous involvement in any other criminal case. Moreover, all the offences alleged against the accused are bailable except the offence punishable under Section 452 IPC which was later on added by the police and 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 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 KUMAR SUMIT 2014.08.23 12:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No. 10504 of 2014 -3- 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 petitioners, 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 petitioners do not cooperate or join the investigation, the prosecution would be at liberty to move a petition for cancellation of their bail, in this Court.
22.08.2014 (Mehinder Singh Sullar)
sumit.k Judge
KUMAR SUMIT
2014.08.23 12:26
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document