High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/13934/2020allowed

Tallu @ Suraj v. State Of Haryana

2020-08-24Mr. Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH (201) Date of Decision : -24.08.2020 Tallu @ Suraj ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana .....Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI Present:- Mr. Ashish Grewal, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Safia Gupta, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. *** (through video conferencing) Harsimran Singh Sethi, J. (Oral) Petitioner is seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No. 239 dated 01.04.2020, registered at Police Station City Yamuna Nagar, District Yamuna Nagar, under Sections 148, 149, 323, 120-B, 379-B and 506 IPC and Sections 325 and 201 IPC added later on.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has joined investigation in terms of order passed by this Court on 24.06.2020. Order dated 24.06.2020 is as under:- "Case is being taken up for hearing through video conferencing.

Through this petition, the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No.239 dated 01.04.2020, registered at Police Station City Yamuna Nagar, District Yamuna Nagar, under

Sections 148, 149, 323, 120-B, 379-B and 506 IPC and Sections 325 and 201 IPC added later on.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that no injury has been attributed to the petitioner. The only allegation against the petitioner is that he took the complainant-injured on his motor-cycle to his house on the pretext of attending the function.

Notice of motion.

Mr. Manish Bansal, DAG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. He admits the fact that no injury has been attributed to the petitioner. However, he states that it was the petitioner, who initiated the fight due to which the incident occurred on 01.04.2020. There are as many as eight accused in the present case.

Adjourned to 24.08.2020.

Meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to join the investigation and if he is sought to be arrested, he shall be released on interim bail to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer/Arresting Officer subject to the conditions as envisaged in Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C."

Learned State counsel, who has also joined the proceedings through video conference, on instructions from ASI Lakhwinder Masih, Police Station City, Yamunanagar, states that in terms of the order of this Court reproduced before, the petitioner has joined the investigation and no further interrogation is required, at this stage. In view of the above, the order dated 24.06.2020 granting interim bail to the petitioner is made absolute. However, the petitioner shall abide by the conditions stipulated under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. He shall also join investigation as and when called upon to do so.

In case at any given point of time hereinafter, it is felt by the Investigating Agency that petitioner is required for the investigation but is not co-operating, it will be at liberty to approach this Court for passing appropriate orders.

The petition stands disposed of.

August 24, 2020 ( HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI ) kanchan/naresh.k JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking?

Yes Whether reportable?