High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/25680/2018allowed

Jagat Singh @ Jagga Singh @ Jagdish Singh v. State Of Haryana

2018-09-05Mr. Justice Arvind Singh Sangwan2 pages

CRM-M No.25680 of 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.25680 of 2018 Decided on: 05.09.2018 Jagat Singh @ Jagga Singh @ Jagdish Singh ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN Present :

Mr. Manoj K. Tanwar, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Himmat Singh, DAG, Haryana.

Mr. S.K. Yadav, Advocate for the complainant.

ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, J. (Oral) The petitioner prays for grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No.97 dated 11.03.2017, registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC at Police Station Mohindergarh, District Mohindergarh. The operative part of the order dated 12.06.2018, vide which interim anticipatory bail has been granted to the petitioner, is reproduced as under:- "....Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an old person aged about 80 years and the allegation pertain to entry of a report mutation No. 1881 dated 01.10.2008 in which the petitioner has thumb marked as a witness.

Counsel for the petitioner further submits that the FIR has been lodged in the year 2017 and the petitioner is not a beneficiary. Counsel for the petitioner further MOHD YAKUB 2018.09.05 16:37 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M No.25680 of 2018 submits that one of the co-accused Vijay Singh has already been granted concession of anticipatory bail vide order dated 24.10.2017 passed in CRM-M- 33481-2017. Notice of motion for 05.09.2018."

Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner, in pursuance to the order dated 12.06.2018, has already appeared before the Investigating Officer and has joined the investigation. Counsel appearing for the complainant has, however, opposed the prayer for bail on the ground that the redemption of the property was done by producing some impersonator in place of the wife of the complainant.

Counsel for the State, on instructions from HC Ashok Kumar, has submitted that the petitioner has joined the investigation on 13.08.2018 and is no more required for further investigation. In view of the above, the petition is allowed and the interim bail granted to the petitioner vide order dated 12.06.2018 is made absolute subject to the conditions envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

(ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN) JUDGE 05.09.2018 yakub Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No MOHD YAKUB 2018.09.05 16:37 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh