Punjab-Haryana High Court
Santosh Malik vs State Of Haryana on 19 April, 2011
Author: Alok Singh
Bench: Alok Singh
CRM No. M-352 of 2011 (O&M)
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM No. M-352 of 2011 (O&M)
Date of decision: 19.04.2011
Santosh Malik
....Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana
....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH
Present: - Mr. Rajesh Lamba, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Vikas Malik, AAG, Haryana.
Mr. S.K. Chauhan, Advocate, for the complainant.
1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2.Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not?
3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
*****
ALOK SINGH, J (ORAL)
This is an application seeking anticipatory bail in case FIR No.671 dated 30.11.2010 under Sections 420/467/468/471/120-B of the Indian Penal Code, Police Station Central Faridabad, District Faridabad.
This Court vide order dated 13.1.2011 has directed to release the petitioner on interim bail.
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that petitioner has already been released on bail and the petitioner has joined the investigation and shall join the investigation as and when she is asked to do so by the Investigating Officer.
Mr. Vikas Malik, learned Assistant Advocate General, Haryana, on instructions of SI Kartar Singh, who is present personally in Court, states that petitioner is co-operating in the investigation and CRM No. M-352 of 2011 (O&M) -2- custodial interrogation is not requested.
Considering totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, petition is allowed. Order dated 13.1.2011 is made absolute, subject to the following conditions: -
i) that she shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
ii) that she shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
iii) that she shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.
It is made clear that in the event of violation of any of the conditions, prosecution shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of the bail.
(Alok Singh) Judge April 19, 2011 R.S.