High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/10504/2022allowed

Keshav Sharma v. State Of Haryana

2022-04-18Mr. Justice Manoj Bajaj3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision-18.04.2022 Keshav Sharma

...Petitioner

Vs.

State of Haryana

...Respondent

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ BAJAJ

Present:

Ms. Deipa Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Bhupender Singh, DAG, Haryana.

Mr. Nikhil Kumar Vashisht, Advocate for Dr. Anand Bishnoi, Advocate for the complainant. *** MANOJ BAJAJ, J. (Oral) Petitioner has approached this Court under Section 438 Code of Criminal Procedure to seek anticipatory bail in case FIR No.36 dated 07.02.2022 under Sections 186, 189, 294 and 353 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Section 506 IPC added subsequently) registered at Police Station Urban Estate Hisar, who apprehends his arrest at the hands of Police. On 07.04.2022, this Court had passed the following order:- "Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the allegations in the FIR relate to the alleged misbehaviour of the petitioner, who allegedly used abusive language against complainant, after forcefully entering her office. She states that the petitioner regrets his conduct and is willing to tender apology to the officer, but as there is no interim protection to the petitioner, therefore, it is apprehended that if he visits the

-2complainant's office, he might be arrested. Learned counsel for the complainant does not oppose the offer made by learned counsel for the petitioner and has submitted that the parties, including three staff members of complainant (witnesses) be directed to appear before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre at Hisar.

Adjourned to 18.04.2022.

Let the parties appear before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre at Hisar on 08.04.2022 at 10.00 A.M. along with complainant's staff in whose presence, the petitioner misbehaved.

Meanwhile the arrest of the petitioner shall remain stayed only till tomorrow."

Today, learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that in compliance of the above order, the parties submitted themselves before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre at Hisar and the dispute between them has been amicably settled. She has argued that in view of this development, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner may not be necessary and she prays for pre-arrest bail.

Learned counsel for the complainant does not dispute the above stand and states that indeed the parties have compromised the dispute and he does not oppose the prayer.

Considering the above stand, this petition is allowed and it is ordered that in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be admitted to interim

-3bail on his furnishing personal and surety bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall also abide by the conditions as specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. (MANOJ BAJAJ) JUDGE 18.04.2022 geeta Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes No Whether Reportable :

Yes No