High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/26359/2016allowed

Sunit Kumar Jain And ANR v. State Of Haryana

2017-02-21Mrs. Justice Raj Rahul Garg2 pages

CRM-M-26359-2016 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-26359-2016 Date of Decision:- 21.02.2017 Sunit Kumar Jain and another ....Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana ....Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI

Present:

Mr. Gautam Dutt, Advocate, for the petitioners.

Ms. Mahima Yashpal, AAG, Haryana.

Mr. D.S. Matya, Advocate for the complainant.

Mr. Himmat Singh, Advocate (Mediator).

**** RITU BAHRI, J. (Oral) Prayer in this petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners, in a case arising out of FIR No.299 dated 25.05.2016, under Sections 420, 498-A, 406 and 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Sohna, District Gurgaon.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are distant relatives of husband of complainant-Nigita and have been falsely implicated in the present case by the complainant. Moreover, no offences are made against them.

Naresh Kumar 2017.02.28 16:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M-26359-2016 -2Keeping in view the above facts, order dated 03.08.2016, passed by this Court whereby ad-interim anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioners is made absolute. The petitioners shall continue to join the investigation as and when required to do so and abide by the conditions mentioned below, as envisaged in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C:- i.

a condition that the person shall make themselves available for interrogation by Police Officer as and when required; ii.

a condition that the persons shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any persons acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

iii. a condition that the persons shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court;

iv.

such other condition as may be imposed under sub section (3) of Section 437, as if the bail was granted under that section. Accordingly, the present petition stands disposed of. February 21, 2017 ( RITU BAHRI ) naresh.k JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No Naresh Kumar 2017.02.28 16:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh