Maju Saini v. State Of Haryana




    
      Date of decision: 4th August, 2015  Manju Saini  Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana  Respondent        
  
 1.

Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers 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?

Present:

Mr. Jagmohan Ghumman, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Deepak Sabharwal, Addl. Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. B.K. Bagri, Advocate for the complainant.

 
!"

# Present petition has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.1062 dated 28.12.2014 registered at Police Station Sector 5, District Gurgaon under Sections 420/406 IPC.

Vide order dated 12.05.2015 while issuing notice of motion, the petitioner was granted interim bail.
Learned State Counsel, on instructions from ASI Deepak, Police Station Sector 5, District Gurgaon, submits that the petitioner RATTAN PAL SINGH 2015.08.05 16:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court



 

has since joined the investigation and is no longer required for further investigation and nothing is to be recovered from her and that he has no objection if the interim order is made absolute. In the light of the statement made by learned State counsel, the interim bail granted to the petitioner vide order dated 11.05.2015 is made absolute on the same terms and conditions till submission of report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. (challan). Thereafter, petitioner will be permitted to furnish regular bail bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court. However, the same shall not prejudice the State in procuring specimen signatures/handwriting of the petitioner.

The petition stands disposed off accordingly. "

 
#   $%$&'(!   RATTAN PAL SINGH 2015.08.05 16:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court