Parveen Kumar v. State Of Haryana And ANR.

Crl. Misc. No. M-29241 of 2017 [ 1 ]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-29241 of 2017 Date of Decision : January 09, 2018 Parveen Kumar .............................................................Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and another ................................. Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL ...

Present:

Mr. Sanjiv Kumar Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Anmol Malik, AAG, Haryana.

None for respondent No.2.

...

LISA GILL, J. (Oral) The petitioner seeks the concession of anticipatory bail in FIR No. 687 dated 29.07.2017 under Sections 354, 506, 376, 511 and 120-B IPC registered at Police Station Thanesar City, District Kurukshetra. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Highly contradictory and illogical version has given by the complainant who is a relative of the petitioner. The complainant along with her two children admittedly resided with the petitioner's family from 12.06.2017 to 18.06.2017. There is no explanation for the delay of 25 days in lodging the FIR. Moreover, the petitioner has joined investigation. He is not involved in any other criminal case. Thus, this petition be allowed. Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Taro, Rupinder Kaur 2018.01.10 15:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Crl. Misc. No. M-29241 of 2017 [ 2 ] verifies that the petitioner has joined investigation and his custodial interrogation is not required. Petitioner is not reported to be involved in any other criminal case.

There is no allegation that the petitioner is likely to abscond or that he is likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts before the learned trial Court, if released on bail. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, it is considered just and expedient to allow this petition. Consequently, order dated 09.10.2017 is made absolute.

None of the observations made here-in-above shall be construed to be a reflection on merits of the case and shall have no bearing on trial.

( LISA GILL ) 09.01.2018 JUDGE rupi Note: Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable:

Yes / No Rupinder Kaur 2018.01.10 15:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document