Amrit Lal v. State Of Haryana

CRM-M-15552-2017 -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH.

Crl. Misc. No.M-15552 of 2017 (O&M) Date of Decision: October 25, 2017 Amrit Lal ......PETITIONER(s).

VERSUS

State of Haryana ....RESPONDENT(s).

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA

Present:

Mr. Inderjeet Singh, Advocate for the petitioner (s).

Mr. Ashish Yadav, Addl.A.G. Haryana.

******* SURINDER GUPTA, J.(Oral) The present petition has been filed under Section 438 Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.65 dated 27.03.2016 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short-IPC) and Sections 467, 468, 471 read with Section 120-B IPC (added later on), at Police Station Naraingarh, District Ambala.

Heard.

The dispute in this case pertains to alienation of the property owned by petitioner Amrit Lal and other owners namely Raj Kumar and Satish Kumar.

Learned State counsel submits that as per the allegations, petitioner along with co-accused had entered into an agreement dated Sachin Mehta 2017.10.26 15:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document HIGH COURT, CHANDIGARH

CRM-M-15552-2017 -210.02.20013 to sell his immovable property in favour of Bachan Singh, which they later sold to Baldev Singh without disclosing him about the earlier agreement and Baldev Singh further sold this property during the pendency of the civil suit filed by Bachan Singh. Petitioners during investigation has joined the investigation, which is still in progress but his custodial interrogation is not required for the purpose of further investigation.

In view of submission of learned State counsel but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this petition is allowed and order dated 30.05.2017 is made absolute till the presentation of challan, subject to the following terms:- (i) that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by the police as and when required; (ii) that the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the accusation against him so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

(iii) that the petitioner shall not leave India without the prior permission of the Court.

(iv) that the petitioner will seek regular bail on the presentation of challan in Court, which the trial Court will decide on the basis of evidence collected during investigation.

( SURINDER GUPTA ) October 25, 2017 JUDGE Sachin M.

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No Sachin Mehta 2017.10.26 15:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document HIGH COURT, CHANDIGARH