High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/26124/2017allowed

Sumit Sharma v. State Of Haryana

2018-03-01Mr. Justice Satpal3 pages

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 1.

Criminal Misc. No.M- 26124 of 2017(O&M) Date of Decision: March 01 , 2018.

Sumit Sharma ...... PETITIONER(s)

Versus

State of Haryana and another ...... RESPONDENT (s) 2.

Criminal Misc. No. M- 25048 of 2017(O&M).

Pawan Kumar Sharma ...... PETITIONER(s)

Versus

State of Haryana ...... RESPONDENT (s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE LISA GILL

Present:

Mr. Ravinder Hooda, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Ashok S.Chaudhary, Addl.AG, Haryana.

Mr. Dinesh Arora, Advocate for the complainant/respondent No.2.

*****

1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2. To be referred to the reporters or not?

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest? ***** LISA GILL, J.

This order shall dispose of CRM No.M-26124 of 2017 (Sumit

-2Sharma v. State of Haryana and another) and CRM No.M-25048 of 2017 (Pawan Kumar Sharma v. State of Haryana).

Prayer in this petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in FIR No.44 dated 13.05.2017 under Sections 498A/376/377/511/ 34 IPC (Sections 376/377/511 IPC stand deleted), registered at Police Station Women Rohtak, District Rohtak.

Petitioner-Sumit Sharma is the husband and petitioner-Pawan Kumar Sharma is the father-in-law of the complainant/respondent No.2. It is informed that the matter has been amicably resolved between the parties during the pendency of this petition. The settlement agreement dated 26.02.2018 is attached with the file of CRM No.M-26124 of 2017. It is submitted the petitioner Sumit Sharma and the complainant have decided to part ways. Petition under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 shall be filed. The specific terms and conditions have been duly mentioned in the said agreement. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that both the petitioners undertake to abide by the terms and conditions of the settlement in letter and spirit.

Learned counsel for the complainant/respondent No.2 submits that his client has no objection in case these petitions are allowed, subject to the petitioners adhering to the terms and conditions of the settlement. The complainant also undertakes to abide by the terms and conditions of the settlement.

Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from Inspector Savitri Devi, verifies that the petitioners have joined investigation and are not involved

-3in any other criminal case. There are no allegations on behalf of the State that the petitioners are likely to abscond, if released on bail. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances as above but without commenting upon or expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, these petitions are allowed. In the event of arrest of the petitioners, they shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of the Arresting/Investigating Officer. Petitioners shall comply with the conditions stipulated in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. It is clarified that none of the observations made hereinabove shall be construed to be a reflection on the merits of the case. The same are solely confined for the purpose of decision of the present petition. ( LISA GILL ) March 01 , 2018.

JUDGE 'om'

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No