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 6, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Rajesh Kumar vs State Of Haryana on 21 November, 2019

Author: Anil Kshetarpal

Bench: Anil Kshetarpal

CRM-M-42699-2019(O&M)                     1

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                     AT CHANDIGARH

                               CRM-M-42699-2019(O&M)
                               Date of decision: 21.11.2019

Rajesh Kumar
                                                 .......Petitioner

                                        Versus

State of Haryana
                                                 ......Respondent


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL

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

            Mr. Manish Bansal, DAG, Haryana

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J. (ORAL)

On 4.10.2019, following order was passed by this Court:-

"Petitioner prays for pre-arrest bail in FIR No.432 dated 5.9.2019 registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC at Police Station Patuadi, District Gurugram.
As per the case of the prosecution, petitioner had submitted a wrong declaration with respect to his qualification while applying for being nominated as Lambardar of the village.
Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that first informant and the petitioner had contested before the authorities for being nominated as Lambardar (Headman) of the village and ultimately petitioner was appointed. He submits that now the petitioner is sought 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 08-12-2019 03:44:51 ::: CRM-M-42699-2019(O&M) 2 to be falsely implicated in the case.
Notice of motion.
On the asking of the Court, Mr. Anmol Malik, AAG, Haryana who is present in Court accepts notice on behalf of State of Haryana and seeks time to get instructions.
Adjourned to 21.11.2019.
In the meantime, in the event of arrest, the petitioners shall be released on interim bail subject to furnishing personal bonds and surety to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. However, the petitioners shall join the investigation as and when called upon to do so and shall abide by the conditions as provided under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C."

Learned State counsel on instructions from ASI Subhash Chander has submitted that petitioner has joined investigation, cooperated and not required for further custodial interrogation.

Learned State counsel has informed the Court that offence under Section 201 IPC has also been added subsequently. This bail order would also cover the aforesaid offence.

In view of the above, order dated 4.10.2019 is hereby made absolute.

Petition stands allowed.



21.11. 2019                             (ANIL KSHETARPAL)
rekha                                          JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned               Yes / No
Whether Reportable                      Yes / No

                               2 of 2
            ::: Downloaded on - 08-12-2019 03:44:52 :::