High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/5222/2020allowed

Piyush Pukhraj Bothra v. State Of Haryana

2021-09-28Mrs. Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Sr. No.204 Case No. : CRM-M No. 5222 of 2020 Date of Decision : September 28, 2021 Piyush Pukhraj Bothra ....

Petitioner vs.

State of Haryana and another ....

Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL. (Through Video Conferencing) * * * Present :

Mr. Vaibhav Narang, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Tanushree Gupta, DAG, Haryana.

Mr. Mehul Singh Tomar, Advocate for repondent no.2 - complainant.

* * * MANJARI NEHRU KAUL , J.

(Oral) :

The instant petition has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No.163 dated 27.12.2019, under Sections 498-A, 406, 377, 34 IPC and Section 10 of the POCSO Act, 2012, registered at Police Station Women, Gurgaon, District Gurgaon. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it was on account of matrimonial dispute between the parties that the complainant got registered the FIR in question against the petitioner, wherein false allegations of mental and physical harassment had been levelled against him. Learned counsel further states that in compliance of the order dated 05.07.2021, passed by this Court, the petitioner has joined investigation. Learned State counsel, assisted by learned counsel for the complainant, on instructions from LASI Chander Kanta, submits that the petitioner has joined investigation and all dowry articles stand recovered. MONIKA 2021.09.28 16:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M No. 5222 of 2020 : 2 :

Learned State counsel has further apprised the Court that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required by the Investigating Agency. However, learned counsel appearing for the complainant submits that despite the parties having been referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre, they have not been able to arrive at amicable settlement on account of the stubbornness of the petitioner. He thus opposes the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

In the wake of instructions received from learned State counsel, the petition is allowed and interim order dated 05.07.2021 is made absolute subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. September 28, 2021 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) monika JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned ?

Yes/No.

Whether reportable ?

Yes/No MONIKA 2021.09.28 16:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document