Punjab-Haryana High Court
Farid Khan vs State Of Haryana on 30 March, 2011
Author: Alok Singh
Bench: Alok Singh
CRM-M No.4619 of 2010 1
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh.
CRM-M No.4619 of 2010 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 30.03.2011
Farid Khan
....Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana
....Respondents.
Coram:- Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Singh
1.Whether reporters of local news papers may be allowed to see
judgement ?
2. To be referred to reporters or not ?
3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ?
Present: Mr. SPS Sidhu, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Ms. Preeti Chaudhary, AAG, Haryana
for the State.
...
Alok Singh, J (Oral).
On 7.1.2011, Ms. Preeti Chaudhary, learned Assistant Advocate General, Haryana, on the instructions of ASI Yashwinder Singh has made statement that FSL report has come stating that original Power of Attorney in the possession of the police does not bear signatures of the alleged executant and now custodial interrogation is not required.
After hearing both the counsel, this Court on 7.1.2011 has allowed the petition making the interim bail order dated 17.2.2010 absolute.
Now present application has been moved before this Court CRM-M No.4619 of 2010 2 stating that after the order dated 7.1.2011, police has added Sections 467/468/471/120-B IPC against the petitioner - accused and now police wants to arrest the petitioner under the newly added sections.
On 3.3.2011, this Court has passed the following order:-
" This Court vide order dated 17.2.2010 has granted interim bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.277 dated 8.12.2009 under Sections 420/447/448/511 of the Indian Penal Code, Police Station DLF Phase II, Gurgaon. On 7.1.2011, ASI Yashbir Singh was present in the Court and on his instructions Ms. Preeti Chaudhary, learned Assistant Advocate General, Haryana has made statement that FSL report has come mentioning therein that original power of attorney in the possession of the police does not bear signatures of the alleged executant and custodial interrogation is not required. This Court vide order dated 7.1.2011 made the interim order dated 17.2.2010 absolute.
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that after final order by this Court on 7.1.2011, Inspector In-charge, Police Post DLF, Phase III, Gurgaon has issued notice to the petitioner on 29.1.2011 and has informed the petitioner that offence punishable under Sections 467/468/471/120-B IPC have been added.
Let Police Inspector, Incharge PP DLF, Phase III, Gurgaon remain present before this Court on 30.3.2011."
Inspector Suresh Kumar, Investigating Officer is present in Court in person alongwith case diary.
CRM-M No.4619 of 2010 3
Inspector Suresh Kumar, Investigating Officer states that new sections were added against the accused petitioner on 12.10.2010. Now he wants that petitioner should join investigation for the newly added sections. However, he assured that he will not arrest the petitioner for the newly added sections and anticipatory bail granted to the petitioner vide order dated 7.1.2011 shall be honoured for the subsequently added sections also.
In view of the statement of Inspector Suresh Kumar, no further order is required to be passed.
Petition stands disposed of in the light of statement of the Investigating Officer.
( Alok Singh ) Judge 30.03.2011 sk.