Ritik Alias Tishu v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-15985-2024 Date of decision: May 27th, 2024 Ritik alias Tishu .....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana .....Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present:

Mr. Vikas Bishnoi, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Deepshikha Chauhan, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana.

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL , J. (ORAL) Petitioner is seeking the concession of bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in case FIR No.59 dated 30.01.2023 under Sections 324, 341 and 34 (Section 326 added later on) of the IPC, registered at Police Station City Fatehabad. 2.

Mr. Sukhwinder Singh Dhillon, Advocate, has entered appearance on behalf of the complainant and filed his power of attorney, which is taken on record.

3.

Status report by way of affidavit of Deputy Superintendent of Police, HQ, Fatehabad, has already been filed in the Registry, which is taken on record.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has at the outset submitted that in the interregnum, the parties, who are residing in the same neighbourhood, have ironed out their differences and arrived at an amicable settlement; the parties would be shortly approaching this Court PUNEET SACHDEVA 2024.05.27 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M-15985-2024 -2for quashing of the FIR in question on the basis of a compromise so effected between them.

5.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant has not disputed the submissions made by the counsel opposite qua the parties having arrived at an amicable settlement. In support, learned counsel has also placed on record a true copy of the compromise. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that in the aforementioned facts and circumstances, he would have no objection in case the petitioner is extended the concession of bail. 6.

Learned State counsel, however, has opposed the prayer and submissions made by the counsel opposite by submitting that the petitioner had inflicted a grievous injury with a knife on the neck of the complainant.

7.

On a query put to the learned State counsel, she on instructions, has not disputed that investigation in the case in hand is complete as challan stands presented and the charges are likely to be framed on the next date of hearing i.e. 30.05.2024. 8.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material placed on record.

9.

In the facts and circumstances as enumerated hereinabove, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner be admitted to bail to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. However, it is made clear that anything observed hereinabove shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. May 27th, 2024 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Puneet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes Whether reportable :

No PUNEET SACHDEVA 2024.05.27 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh